Henry F. Fradella: No independent reliable sources to demonstrate notability.  2 of the 4 current sources are quasi-self-published (academic bios from his employers).  Several non-independent sources used in the article, e.g. an award granted to the subject by the society of which he was president.  Overall seems unduly self-serving.  Barnards.tar.gz ( talk ) 17:07, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Law .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Arizona , California , Massachusetts , New Jersey ,  and Washington, D.C. .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per WP:AUTHOR .  Four reviews of three books: JSTOR 26425117 , JSTOR 27099000 , JSTOR 43186625 , JSTOR 26546031 .  Probably there's more but I only had time to search JSTOR.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 19:07, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep : The book reviews in JStor seem listed above fine, about books he co-authored; that's honestly more than most people that show up here in AfD have.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:14, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I am the person referenced on this page.   I had no idea it even existed.   I would like it deleted, please.  DrHenryFFradella ( talk ) 02:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Requests by an article's subject to have the article deleted are sometimes considered ( WP:BIODEL ), but an issue is that anybody can create a user account with any name, so there is currently nothing proving that the Wikipedia account User:DrHenryFFradella is actually owned by the subject of the article.  Barnards.tar.gz ( talk ) 12:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Requests by "relatively unknown, non-public figures" may be considered in some circumstances, but a full professor at a major research university who publishes books on major publishers, actively takes part in public and scholarly discourse, who gets reviewed and is relatively highly cited, who is elected president of a major scholarly society is not a "relatively unknown, non-public figure".  Indeed, it's a very public activity.  -- Amanda A. Brant ( talk ) 15:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Clearly a very well-established academic, full professor at a major research university, extensive list of publications/books published by major publishers, 2,401 scholarly citations [14] is quite high in law (likely in the in the top 0.1 percent among legal academics, citation counts in law are generally much lower than in the sciences).  Past president of the main criminology association in the western US (an area much larger than many countries).  A number of reviews of his books.  He literally has an award named after him, awarded by the main scholarly association of criminologists in the western US.  [15] -- Amanda A. Brant ( talk ) 02:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per David Eppstein.  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 14:57, 20 March 2024 (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