Jennifer Pan (professor): A Senior Fellow does not seem to be a qualifier.  Zaathras ( talk ) 14:00, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Women .  Shellwood ( talk ) 14:02, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Her book, Welfare for Autocrats , is certainly notable (per WP:NBOOK ), having been reviewed in multiple reliable sources.  pburka ( talk ) 14:06, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Keep The article was submitted to AfC and was kicked back.  Last night it was moved back to draft by LilianaUwU as it  1) is not ready for mainspace  2) the person who keeps moving it to mainspace has a history of moving articles from draft to mainspace and they get moved back again for various reasons  3) this article came from another users draft space  4) For one book they did five citations of which only two are reviews and  5) they introduced a lot of cs1 errors in the article that have to be fixed by hand.  She doesn’t meet WP:NACADEMIC .  While her book Welfare for Aristocrats does seem to have some weight behind it [1] and a few others.  I do lot see them meeting any criteria of WP:AUTHOR .  The citations listed next to the book in the article are mostly abstracts of the book and to purchase them / not acceptable as sources (I removed them and editor added them all back).  Based on evidence submitted below by an administrator showing the citations and such (I do not understand the back door thing) but I have changed my statement to keep.  2600:8801:CA05:EF00:D41E:2828:7AA7:A58D ( talk ) 15:32, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] References ^ Jiang, Min (October 2022).  "Book Review: Welfare for Autocrats: How Social Assistance in China Cares for its Rulers by Jennifer Pan" .  The International Journal of Press/Politics .  27 (4): 971–974.  doi : 10.1177/19401612221102056 .  ISSN 1940-1612 .  Retrieved 24 May 2023 .  Keep .  One well-reviewed and notable book isn't enough for WP:AUTHOR notability by itself, but her high citation counts on Google Scholar [8] are easily enough for WP:PROF#C1 .  The history of new-page-patroller violations of WP:DRAFTIFY in an attempt to backdoor-delete this is also not a reason for deletion.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 16:15, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I agree with DE.  Between the book and two >1000 citation papers she meets WP:NPROF .  AfC is not mandatory and AfD is WP:NOTCLEANUP .  pburka ( talk ) 16:56, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , per David Eppstein and Pburka.   -- Jayron 32 17:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ David Eppstein Thanks for fixing the ref I couldn’t remember what the coding was.  2600:8801:CA05:EF00:D41E:2828:7AA7:A58D ( talk ) 17:05, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong Keep : AfD is WP:NOTCLEANUP and I agree with David Eppstein and Pburka.  CastJared ( talk ) 19:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong Keep — The subject of the article is a professional acquaintance (but not WP:COI ) and contacted me after someone emailed her about the ongoing AfD.   I agree that the subject easily meets the WP:NPROF#C1 bar based on citations and impact.  I asked Dr. Pan for a list of potential press publications discussing her and/or her work with the idea that that might be useful for ongoing efforts to improve the article.  She sent me quite a few pieces in high quality reliable places.  I copied all the links onto Talk:Jennifer Pan (professor) .  — m a k o ๛ 19:44, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep