Deletion of Douglas Warrick

Comment: insufficient record/impact to pass 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Could not find enough to establish notability under . Does not seem to pass  either. Early career academic who may become notable in the future, but not yet
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:BIO)

Comment: Seems to pass  via prong #1. I brought this article up on IRC quite some time ago to see if I should AfD it, which prompted several improvements including the addition of the nature articles. The article has improved even more since then, and I think now the sources do, at least narrowly, establish notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Targeted Web of Science|WoS query "Author=(warrick d*) Refined by: Institutions=(OREGON STATE UNIV OR UNIV MONTANA) Timespan=All Years. Databases=SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI" shows an h-index of 7. His papers are mostly low-author count and he appears to be primary author on many of them. Promising, but still a ''long'' way from being notable according to . Another asst prof article too early. Respectfully
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Msrasnw, "keep due to being quoted once by the BBC" isn't a strong argument. The coverage of his work by a handful of news sources does not confer notability. The articles were all generated by a single press release from ''Nature'', and do not give significant coverage of him as an individual. This is in effect . He has only about 20 publications and seems to be a |run-of-the-mill Assistant Professor. The coverage of him and his impact on his field is insufficient to warrant an article. We already cover his work appropriately here: Rufous Hummingbird#Research on hummingbird hovering
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT||WP:MILL)

Comment: per  based on Agricola44's comments, etc... above
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)