Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Filardi

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:32, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Filardi

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP1E EnPassant (talk) 14:32, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

KeepHe is a widely cited biologist with a significant job at a major research institution. It is true that this brief start on an article about a scientist needs expansion, and that the current condition may have misled User:EnPassant into thinking that Filardi's accomplishments began and ended with the Moustached kingfisher. Passes WP:PROFESSOR. I have added search bars.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:56, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 15:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:22, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, week-ish, but still. Gscholar gives him the h-index of 16, which is OK, but in an a high citation field like molecular biology not sufficient to satisfy WP:PROF#C1 on its own. Of the 4 well-cited papers, he is the first author on one. The kingfisher episode has a WP:BIO1E feel to it. I am not seeing anything else to hang one's hat on in terms of satisfying WP:PROF after looking up his staff profile page at the American Museum of Natural History. No mentions of things like awards, society fellowships, journal editorships, prestigious lectures, etc. Still looks to me like a WP:TOOSOON case. Nsk92 (talk) 20:45, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He is not a molecular biologist, he is a wildlife biologist, first author a number of papers, including : (Filardi, Christopher E., and Joshua Tewksbury. “Ground-Foraging Palm Cockatoos (Probosciger Aterrimus) in Lowland New Guinea: Fruit Flesh as a Directed Deterrent to Seed Predation?” Journal of Tropical Ecology, vol. 21, no. 4, 2005, pp. 355–361. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/4092013,) (FILARDI, CHRISTOPHER E., and CATHERINE E. SMITH. “SOCIAL SELECTION AND GEOGRAPHIC VARIATION IN TWO MONARCH FLYCATCHERS FROM THE SOLOMON ISLANDS - Selección Social y Variación Geográfica En Dos Especies De Monarcha De Las Islas Solomon.” The Condor, vol. 110, no. 1, 2008, pp. 24–34. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/cond.2008.110.1.24,) (Filardi, Christopher E., and Sievert Rohwer. “Life History Implications of Complete and Incomplete Primary Molts in Pelagic Cormorants.” The Condor, vol. 103, no. 3, 2001, pp. 555–569. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1369827.) and similar, including a widely major paper in Nature (journal). Nature. 2005 Nov 10;438(7065):216-9.

Single origin of a pan-Pacific bird group and upstream colonization of Australasia. Filardi CE1, Moyle RG.. Note that he is also widely cited not only in popular books on tropical conservation. Moreover, this is not the usuual BLP1E kind of episode. The online mobbing and spate of irrational, inaccurate news coverage was followed not only by more serious coverage in places like The Guardian [1], but also by last week's long, thoughtful essay in the New York Times was by Kirk W. Johnson, author of The Feather Thief, who was interviewing Filardi as part of a book project, although it is not clear whether Filardi appears in Johnson's recent book, or on one that he is writing now. And he had been in the news before UPI 19 April 2007 New genus of bird found in South Pacific, "...a new genus of frogmouth bird on a South Pacific island..."; in the Folha de S.Paulo, 5 July 2009 Até que Darwin os separe discussing new species on oceanic islands, and more similar.E.M.Gregory (talk) 02:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HEY I expanded the article. His work on populations, evolution, and ecosystems has been getting written up magazines like National Geographic for years.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:15, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The popular press coverage of his work (now for multiple topics thanks to EMG's expansion) documents a pass of WP:GNG and WP:PROF#C7. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:50, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: sources present in the article sufficiently establish notability; the subject is notable in his field, as can be seen in GBooks preview, for example: [2]. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:42, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Borderline PROF. The continuing in-depth coverage in popular press - e.g. wapo in 2015 and [nyt in 2018 takes this past the notability threshold.Icewhiz (talk) 12:34, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:GNG and WP:PROF. \\\Septrillion:- ~~‭~~10^Eleventeen 20:52, 6 July 2018 (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.