687:-- I agree with most comments above that the question of whether she passes any particular notability guideline is borderline, but unlike most BLPs in that situation there is clearly enough sourcing out there to write a good short biography. And that's what the article is: a short biography whose deletion would not improve the encyclopedia in any identifiable way. Since I should probably hang some WP:JARGON on this argument, I am saying that I agree with scope_creep that the sourcing here meets WP:SIGCOV. --
705:
Would you please show me the significant independent coverage of her that is besides her award (hence my mention of BIO1E)? I'm willing to change my vote, but I'd like someone to show me the coverage required to show notability. I find an unsupported claim that "there is clearly enough sourcing out
563:
Unless winning the annual
Outstanding Achievement Award from the Women in Aerospace organization grants notability on its own, I'm not seeing how she's notable. The university articles and Lockheed awards are not independent and the only other thing mentioned is that award. She has only a few
473:
C3 or C5. Whichever, the case is weak, and should be supported by some evidence of impact. I don't see much mention of the Lynn Reagor method outside of profiles of the subject; Datascape is harder to search for, but I didn't find anything. I'm watching this AfD in case better evidence of
469:. Notability is not inherited from that of fuzzy logic. The method that she invented has little coverage, and what little there is is incidental. I'm uncertain whether internal company award (even from a company as big as Lockheed Martin) is more like
201:
346:, although obviously not in as academic a context. And in being based on the Agnes Scott College profile and the TCU magazine piece, the article has a plausible case for the multiple in-depth sources required by
296:
233:
402:
to the core connections to her notability. The WIA award was presented to her from the
Associate Director of Technology for the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
316:
195:
277:
154:
670:
C3 very weak keep argument. I'm not persuaded by this in the near absence of evidence for C1 (which C3 is supposed to be a shortcut for), but perhaps others will be.
257:
422:
86:
101:
533:
There is a couple of uni articles on her, there is a gbook ref, magazine ref and I think there is probably more if a deep search is done. I think passes
161:
127:
122:
354:
131:
114:
81:
74:
17:
606:
and I don't believe her award is sufficient to confer automatic notability. All independent coverage is related to the one award (
216:
183:
398:
then her connection to the topic through awards shows a notable status. Any coverage which is dubious is really support via
95:
91:
628:
598:
I did another search for sources and I still couldn't find significant independent coverage that shows me that she meets
492:
52:. The keep arguments on sourcing were by assertion and were refuted by detailed discussion of sources by the delete side
738:
177:
40:
719:
696:
679:
649:
619:
590:
573:
555:
524:
505:
483:
434:
411:
373:
351:
340:
328:
308:
288:
269:
249:
56:
173:
350:, but independence is dubious in both cases because of her alumna status. There's also a little more coverage at
118:
675:
479:
430:
369:
659:
that
Lockheed Martin Fellows were one of the classes of people used to seed the initial class of SIAM fellows.
223:
692:
418:
110:
62:
237:
734:
586:
36:
356:
but as a blog post and a press release from her employer they don't much strengthen the case for GNG.
520:
407:
707:
671:
663:
475:
426:
365:
232:
This article is mostly built off one source. The TCU Magazine source is a student publication. The
209:
189:
542:
455:
361:
715:
706:
there to write a good short biography" unconvincing and not part of any WP notability criteria.
688:
662:(She apparently wasn't a SIAM member, so isn't a fellow, but otherwise would be.) This supports
615:
569:
324:
304:
667:
607:
603:
564:
citations in Google
Scholar. I'll wait to vote until others have had a chance to enlighten me.
534:
470:
281:
70:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
733:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
399:
383:
343:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
660:
582:
548:
265:
245:
599:
538:
395:
347:
516:
403:
342:
the
Lockheed Technical Fellow honor appears to be close to the sort of thing we count for
640:
357:
236:
has coverage from
Lockheed Martin press releases and not much else. The subject fails
711:
611:
565:
364:
is primary for the award she won, but independent of her almae matres and employer. —
320:
300:
502:
53:
581:
I'm thinking along the same lines as
Papaursa, but verging towards a weak delete.
148:
391:
387:
261:
241:
339:. As a program that honors less than 1% of the Lockheed technical staff
515:. Seems to be known only in-company. GS cites don't come to much.
602:
or any other notability criteria. She definitely fails to meet
729:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
456:
https://www.womeninaerospace.org/events/gallery/2005awards.html
631:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
495:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
297:
list of
Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
144:
140:
136:
208:
390:
as seen in her award from the WIA. I believe that if
637:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
501:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
222:
423:Knowledge (XXG):Sockpuppet investigations/Milesr3
386:as her research has made a significant impact to
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
741:). No further edits should be made to this page.
317:list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions
315:Note: This discussion has been included in the
295:Note: This discussion has been included in the
276:Note: This discussion has been included in the
256:Note: This discussion has been included in the
278:list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions
8:
102:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
314:
294:
275:
258:list of Women-related deletion discussions
255:
448:
710:is not enough of an argument for me.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
87:Introduction to deletion process
382:I can see the relationship to
1:
77:(AfD)? Read these primers!
758:
720:01:09, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
474:notability is uncovered.
57:06:51, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
731:Please do not modify it.
697:21:28, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
680:19:09, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
650:17:36, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
620:01:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
591:10:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
574:23:39, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
556:11:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
525:02:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
506:07:08, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
484:11:17, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
435:19:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
412:04:51, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
374:17:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
360:is a little better. And
329:14:40, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
309:14:40, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
289:00:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
270:20:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
250:20:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
111:Mary Pensworth Reagor
75:Articles for deletion
63:Mary Pensworth Reagor
234:Reagor Lynn Method
652:
648:
508:
437:
331:
311:
291:
272:
92:Guide to deletion
82:How to contribute
749:
647:
645:
638:
636:
634:
632:
553:
551:
500:
498:
496:
458:
453:
417:
286:
227:
226:
212:
164:
152:
134:
72:
34:
757:
756:
752:
751:
750:
748:
747:
746:
745:
739:deletion review
653:
641:
639:
627:
625:
549:
547:
509:
491:
489:
463:
462:
461:
454:
450:
282:
169:
160:
125:
109:
106:
69:
66:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
755:
753:
744:
743:
725:
724:
723:
722:
700:
699:
682:
672:Russ Woodroofe
664:David Eppstein
635:
624:
623:
622:
593:
576:
558:
528:
499:
488:
487:
486:
476:Russ Woodroofe
460:
459:
447:
446:
442:
441:
440:
439:
438:
427:David Eppstein
376:
366:David Eppstein
337:Very weak keep
333:
332:
312:
292:
273:
230:
229:
166:
105:
104:
99:
89:
84:
67:
65:
60:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
754:
742:
740:
736:
732:
727:
726:
721:
717:
713:
709:
704:
703:
702:
701:
698:
694:
690:
686:
683:
681:
677:
673:
669:
665:
661:
658:
655:
654:
651:
646:
644:
633:
630:
621:
617:
613:
609:
605:
601:
597:
594:
592:
588:
584:
580:
577:
575:
571:
567:
562:
559:
557:
554:
552:
544:
540:
536:
532:
529:
526:
522:
518:
514:
511:
510:
507:
504:
497:
494:
485:
481:
477:
472:
468:
465:
464:
457:
452:
449:
445:
436:
432:
428:
424:
420:
419:WP:SOCKSTRIKE
416:
415:
414:
413:
409:
405:
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
381:
377:
375:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
352:
349:
345:
341:
338:
335:
334:
330:
326:
322:
318:
313:
310:
306:
302:
298:
293:
290:
287:
285:
279:
274:
271:
267:
263:
259:
254:
253:
252:
251:
247:
243:
239:
235:
225:
221:
218:
215:
211:
207:
203:
200:
197:
194:
191:
188:
185:
182:
179:
175:
172:
171:Find sources:
167:
163:
159:
156:
150:
146:
142:
138:
133:
129:
124:
120:
116:
112:
108:
107:
103:
100:
97:
93:
90:
88:
85:
83:
80:
79:
78:
76:
71:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
730:
728:
684:
656:
642:
626:
595:
578:
560:
546:
530:
512:
490:
466:
451:
443:
379:
378:
336:
284:CAPTAIN RAJU
283:
238:WP:NACADEMIC
231:
219:
213:
205:
198:
192:
186:
180:
170:
157:
68:
49:
47:
31:
28:
583:Kj cheetham
550:scope_creep
467:Weak delete
392:fuzzy logic
388:fuzzy logic
358:This source
196:free images
708:WP:ILIKEIT
643:Sandstein
517:Xxanthippe
444:References
404:Bioforce12
344:WP:PROF#C3
735:talk page
543:WP:SIGCOV
37:talk page
737:or in a
712:Papaursa
668:WP:NPROF
629:Relisted
612:Papaursa
608:WP:BIO1E
604:WP:NPROF
566:Papaursa
535:WP:THREE
493:Relisted
471:WP:NPROF
362:this one
321:TJMSmith
301:TJMSmith
155:View log
96:glossary
39:or in a
657:Comment
579:Comment
561:Comment
503:Spartaz
400:WP:PSTS
384:WP:PROF
202:WP refs
190:scholar
128:protect
123:history
73:New to
54:Spartaz
600:WP:GNG
596:Delete
539:WP:BIO
513:Delete
421:; see
396:WP:GNG
394:meets
348:WP:GNG
262:Kbabej
242:Kbabej
174:Google
132:delete
50:delete
217:JSTOR
178:books
162:Stats
149:views
141:watch
137:links
16:<
716:talk
693:talk
685:Keep
676:talk
616:talk
587:talk
570:talk
541:and
531:Keep
521:talk
480:talk
431:talk
408:talk
380:Keep
370:talk
353:and
325:talk
305:talk
266:talk
246:talk
210:FENS
184:news
145:logs
119:talk
115:edit
689:JBL
666:'s
610:).
425:. —
224:TWL
153:– (
718:)
695:)
678:)
618:)
589:)
572:)
545:.
537:,
523:)
482:)
433:)
410:)
372:)
327:)
319:.
307:)
299:.
280:.
268:)
260:.
248:)
240:.
204:)
147:|
143:|
139:|
135:|
130:|
126:|
121:|
117:|
714:(
691:(
674:(
614:(
585:(
568:(
527:.
519:(
478:(
429:(
406:(
368:(
323:(
303:(
264:(
244:(
228:)
220:·
214:·
206:·
199:·
193:·
187:·
181:·
176:(
168:(
165:)
158:·
151:)
113:(
98:)
94:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.