Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carroll Alley
leaning towards weak delete. Somehow, after looking through the sources mentioned above I am not finding them quite sufficient for passing a notability case under either  or . For the latter, there seems to be fairly little evidence of passing the standard criteria of  in terms of scientific impact or citability of his work by other scholars (GoogleScholarhttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?&q=%22Carroll+Alley%22 and WoS give fairly little), nor are there significant academic awards, journal editorships or the like. There may be a passable  case, but somehow I don't see it based on the references provided. The NASA, TIME and most googlenews and googlebooks references provide coverage that is mostly of fairly weak nature: as someone who relayed some information to somebody else, or performed some fairly technical (even if important technical) function in the Apollo project. The coverage never really seems to concentrate on him, and his sientific/engineering role in NASA is not described as sufficiently prominent (at least not IMO). One could, perhaps, make an argument that there is a multiple nontrivial coverage here which makes this pass , but I personally don't quite see it here
— User:Nsk92, 11:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BIO||WP:ACADEMIC||WP:ACADEMIC||WP:BIO||WP:BIO (Wikipedia:Notability)