Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristina Curry Rogers

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 of the debate was keep. – Robert 04:28, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kristina Curry Rogers

non-notable, possible vanity bio Batman2005 04:26, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

NOTE article creator added quite a bit of information after article was posted for deletion. Asserts quite a bit more notability. I'm open to keeping it so long as the rest of the community is in agreeance. Batman2005 06:29, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

thanks Batman2005 :-) However, now that I'm here I might as well cast my vote, which is the same and for the same reasons as the one I gave for the Jeffrey Wilson page - MAK

• Strong Keep. As a published researcher in the field of paleontology, Dr Curry Rogers is certainly notable. As is obvious from the list of published papers in many scientific journals on the bio page, she fits the wikipedia notability category of published authors who have written articles in periodicals with a circulation of 5,000 or more (papers published in scientific journals). In addition, she has also written one chapter and co-authored one chapter in one book (Sauropods - Evolution and Paleobiology) and one chapter in another book (The Scientific American Book of Dinosaurs). Add to that, as the co-editor of one of those books, she is an editor of a book with an audience of 5,000 or more.

Comment: As I've already pointed out on Batman2005's user talk page, and Jeffrey Wilson AfD page, but will repeat it here; while there are plenty of entries on Wikipedia on a many different dinosaur genera (something I do support and think is cool), there are still as yet very few write-ups on the paleontologists who are making these discoveries. This means that Wikipedia has lots of stuff on names and types of dinosaurs, but very little on the real science and scientists behind their discovery! For this reason, pages on scientists who have made important discoveries in this field are absolutely necessary. In fact this is one of the tasks I have set myself here on Wikipedia. M Alan Kazlev 09:38, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Notable enough in her field for mine. Capitalistroadster 10:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Notable enought in her own field to merit an article on the find in Paleontology News and overall to merit mention in National Geographic. 70.122.87.59 12:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Obvious Keep,. Monicasdude 15:12, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep --Terence Ong 15:45, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. -Ikkyu2 21:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

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.