Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Karpowitz

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 keep. Thanks everyone who participated in the discussion. If you aren't too pleased with this decision, please take it to the article talk page or renominate the article. Missvain (talk) 14:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Karpowitz

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

Delete: this may just be my opinion, and a minority one at that, but this stub article seems to be self-serving: a resume/Curriculum Vitae (CV), better suited elsewhere. Quis separabit? 02:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Doesn't meet wp:academics as Associate Professor with no honors or awards. (The "best paper" award is not enough for notability.) LaMona (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just notified the creator of this new article, someone who has been editing on academic topics for a couple of years and must have had a reason for creating this.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Needs editing, paring, expansion with sourcing but a couple of quick searches shows that his work is being substantively cited and discussed.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Note: I created the article. Not sure why "best paper" from the American Political Science Association is not enough for notability? --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 00:14, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. The Vintage Feminist (talk) 00:14, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. The Vintage Feminist (talk) 00:14, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not heavily-enough cited to convince me of a pass of WP:PROF#C1, best paper award is not at the level of #C2, and what else is there? —David Eppstein (talk) 17:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He clearly meets the notability for academics requirement that the person has been quoted and gone to by major national media outlets as an expert. He is also the co-director of BYU's Center for Elections and Democracy, and his "Silent Sex" book is clearlya major publication that has had significant impact.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:59, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Karpowitz's top two articles have 66 and 65 cittations per google scholar. I was trying to figure out his citiatiojn index, but do not know how to do that.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:04, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 18:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - marginally passes WP:BIO/WP:NACADEMIC. The list of publications certainly made it CV-like, so I just went ahead and removed all but the books. Less CV-like now :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 22:26, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Silent Sex has been widely reviewed.[1][2][3][4][5] He was only one of 2 co-writers but I think in conjunction with the other content, he's notable. The article does need analysis, assessment, and criticism of his work. Colapeninsula (talk) 17:12, 12 July 2015 (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.