Deletion of George W. Grantham

Comment: Passes neither  nor . Adding to the points made above, most widely held book in libraries, ''Technical and organizational change in French agriculture between 1840 and 1880'', currently in less than 5 libraries worldwide according to http://www.worldcat.org WorldCat
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:BIO)

Comment: I'm not sure Google scholar is the right way to measure impact in this field, but I only get an h-index of 6 using GS, not enough to convince me of a pass of #C1. I'd be willing to change my mind on this with sufficient specific evidence of impact, but just asserting that he's "well published and cited" isn't good enough. As for the other  criteria, the only other one that seems plausible is the Clio Can, but that seems to be a service award for "Exceptional Support to the Field of Cliometrics" so I'm not convinced it qualifies as a "highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level" under criterion #C2
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Professor emeritus is not a title of any particular distinction suitable for passing . It just means "retired professor". So I think the comments of Carrite and Msrasnw should be interpreted based on what they say about his achievements, citations, and prizes, not for that title
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Can't see any basis on which he fits the requirements of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: as meeting notability guidelines for 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:AUTHOR)