Deletion of Kerry Chamberlain

Comment: He's had a reasonable amount of attention in the NZ press: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/health/news/article.cfm?c_id=204&objectid=10528506 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10691065 http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=63673&cat=975 http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/48583/new-study-examine-homelessness http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED0809/S00074.htm. And he was a keynote speaker at the NZ Psychological Society Annual Meeting 2009. But more convincing to me (because it's less local) are the Google scholar citation counts: he's one of the world's most-cited scholars in melatonin jet-lag research, and also well-cited (though not quite as much as the top researchers) in psychological well-being. That's enough to convince me of a pass of #1
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: as meets  criterion 3 (which explicitly includes academics in its remit): "The person has ... played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work ... that has been the subject ... of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Evidence: reviews of co-authored book ''Qualitative Health Psychology: theories and methods'' in http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3711/is_200202/ai_n9071593/ ''Canadian Psychology'', http://hpq.sagepub.com/content/6/2/261 ''Journal of Health Psychology'', http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/content/10/3/235.1.full.pdf ''European Journal of Public Health'', http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.1473b.x/abstract ''Journal of Advanced Nursing''. Presumably the place to debate or consider changing the wording of that particular criterion would be WT:BIO rather than here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)