Deletion of APA Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Applied Research

Comment: this article like others Onsager Medal, is essentially a detailed  of the American Psychological Association.  Details of the award and the list of awardees could be included in the APA article, but would bias the APA article in an awkward way.  Furthermore, this award, as a ''lifetime'' award (some other awards are "only" early career, in which case the recipients are on their way to notability but haven't got their yet - and of course, some don't make it, but this is a lifetime award).  As a lifetime award, this confers #2, to its recipients, and so the redlinks shouldn't be red.  As it is, the article is a short description - essentially a , with instead of the main content is a list of recipients.  It thus  is a hybrid between a list and an article, with a tendency towards the former.  It meets the criteria at .  This is how to stub biographies quickly - start with a list.  There are plenty of other such articles on Wikipedia.  I thank
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (WP:FORK||WP:PROF||WP:LEAD||WP:NLIST)

Comment: the nominator is right, the article has a bunch of red links. Taking a quick look, though, it would seem there is a good number of them who might be |notable and deserving or articles. American Psychologist called Manfred J. Meier (a red link in the subject article), ''"one of the most influential figures in the establishment of clinical neuropsychology as a specialty field."'' I just don't know that we have a lot of editors writing about notable clinical psychologists. Bruce E. Wampold (also a red link) acts as an in-house expert on psychotherapy for the American Psychological Association (those who give out the subject award) but has also written a bunch of well-cited books. Should also probably be a blue link. On the award itself, there is some coverage http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/psycarticles-reg/award-for-distinguished-professional-contributions-to-applied-research-uFecHk6cnw like this, but a lot of it is in American Psychologist (of course), the official journal of the APA. I suppose that's problematic in terms of independence. I think if the article was a big list of blue links, this probably wouldn't have been nominated. My suggestion is that many of them should be
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)