Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emma Shuttleworth

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. ✗plicit 11:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Emma Shuttleworth

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article lacks a claim to notability; subject does not appear notable in WP terms. Tagishsimon (talk) 10:52, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

keep Added further details and citations regarding the innovative approach of her work Kaybeesquared (talk) 13:03, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

keep: I wrote the article on the Great North Bog, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_North_Bog which is clearly a huge environmental programme which will have significant impact and involves many partners. A fact about coir in that article was nominated as a 'did you know' for wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Great_North_Bog The research about coir is Shuttleworth's and she is quoted in the Guardian article. I recieved my alert from Women in Red project that 2022 is a year to focus on women in climate, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Meetup/214 asking for articles on women involved in research, lobbying, politics and related fields aimed at reducing the impact of climate on global warming. Since this research underpins a large policy change, it seemed like she would be notable. I am happy to try to make this link more clear in the article, and hope others will join in to add more about the knowledge exchange impact of research. This is my first contribution to that theme.Melissa Highton (talk) 11:58, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, the Guardian article features Shuttleworth quite strongly, and indicates that her work has public notability. Melissa Highton, do you know of any further independent sources of comparable weight? They would greatly aid the chances of this article being kept. Elemimele (talk) 15:48, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have added some further citations and the work quoted in the Guardian also features in The Times but is behind a paywall. The project Shuttleworth is leading is part of UN global initiative, though not named here https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/03/1059632. Kaybeesquared (talk) 16:32, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It looks WP:TOOSOON for WP:NPROF for this 2014 PhD: in particular, the citation record is a good bit short of WP:NPROF C1, and the associate editorship does not meet WP:NPROF C8. The Guardian article quotes the subject somewhat substantially on her area of expertise, but I'm not seeing anything that meets WP:BASIC here. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:29, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete Definitely doesn't meet WP:NPROF as far as I can see. Not convinced other sources are enough to warrant passing WP:GNG, but could be convinced otherwise. As Russ Woodroofe said, there is some quoting, which isn't quite independant enough. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:08, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as far WP:Too soon for WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]
Delete - I agree it's WP:Too soon. Most of the references are not independent (her own writings, her university page), and her H-Index is 6. While H-Index is not a precise measure of academic worth, it does give a ballpark of where someone fits into the academic scheme of things. It is possible that her work could find a place on the pages for Mires or Great North Bog or some other topic in her area of expertise. That would be a way of holding on her work until she achieves WP:NPROF. Lamona (talk) 23:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only at the begining of the academic achievement scale as a lecturer and nothing else of note. scope_creep^Talk 09:35, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.