Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lu Ann Homza

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. Mz7 (talk) 08:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lu Ann Homza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No evidence of notability, and reads rather non neutral. Slatersteven (talk) 10:11, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:39, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep notable author and historian. Her books have been reviewed in reliable independent sources and there is very substantial coverage of her academic programs including study abroad in Pamplona reviewing hand-written documents with her students. FloridaArmy (talk) 11:45, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It might help if some of these sources were in the article.Slatersteven (talk) 12:41, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:49, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:49, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:49, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I just added citations to nine reviews of two of her books to the article. I think that's enough for WP:AUTHOR. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:58, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Passes WP:AUTHOR. The biographical details given are of the pedestrian sort which can be sourced to references affiliated with the subject. XOR'easter (talk) 22:27, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Thanks to the recently added citations, I'd agree that she passes muster as WP:AUTHOR. -Kenirwin/(talk) 15:33, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, adding to the pile of snow, meets WP:NAUTHOR, books have been reviewed in a large number of publications. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:58, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, makes sense given the additions and citations. Kaylea Champion (talk) 05:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per book reviews added by User:David Eppstein.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:09, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep -- Her output is modest, but the post of Dean is more senior than head of department (which would be held by a professor in the British sense of the term. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:54, 26 April 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.