In this article we will delve into the fascinating world of
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clèmerson Merlin Clève, exploring its various facets, its evolution over time and its impact on today's society. From its origins to its most recent applications,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clèmerson Merlin Clève has left an indelible mark in fields as diverse as science, culture, technology and politics. Throughout the next lines, we will analyze in depth its most relevant aspects, unraveling its mysteries and discovering its relevance today. Get ready to immerse yourself in an exciting journey through
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clèmerson Merlin Clève, a topic that will not leave anyone indifferent.
- 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. Nakon 04:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- Clèmerson Merlin Clève (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 exceptional notability established other than being a jurist, professor and lawyer. seicer | talk | contribs 04:49, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. WP:N requires that article topics be notable, not exceptionally notable, so the nomination does not appear to advance a valid rationale for deletion. Multiple papers with 100+ cites is notability in any field. I suspect that a GS h-index of 14 will also satisfy criteria 1 of WP:PROF in this field. Law is apparently a very low citation field for academics. According to LSE, the average h-index of a (full) law professor (2.8) is the lowest of any of the social sciences, significantly less than the average across all such disciplines (4.9), and far below the number suggested by Hirsch for a (full) professor of physics (18). James500 (talk) 09:06, 8 February 2015 (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.