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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion.

As an aside, I find much of linguistics "impenetrable". I haven't tried to read his work though. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:43, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Kravchenko (linguist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

He sounds like he might meet WP:PROF even if not WP:GNG, but I couldn't find sources to confirm this. Boleyn (talk) 14:02, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:38, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:38, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Language. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NAUTHOR might qualify if people can find more reviews of his books, I quickly found doi:10.1075/arcl.1.15sha but my knowledge of Russian isn't good enough to find more at this moment. Umimmak (talk) 21:51, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

:He appears to be a relatively significant linguist - not just an academic. BulgarianCat (talk) 10:13, 12 February 2024 (UTC)WP:SOCKSTRIKE[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: What's his citation factor, given the large number of papers found in Gscholar, I'd be surprised if he doesn't pass academic notability... Seems to be cited by over 700 other papers per ResearchGate [1] Oaktree b (talk) 16:53, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. I'm seeing citation counts on Google Scholar of 247 ("Essential properties of language"), 116 ("The experiential basis of speech and writing"), 97 ("Two views on language ecology and ecolinguistics"), and then dropping steeply from there. This is borderline, but not really enough to convince me. Given that there doesn't seem to be much to say beyond the citation counts (it doesn't help that his writing is so impenetrable, apparently deliberately, as to make it impossible to infer what his actual contributions are), I'm inclined to put this on the delete side of the border. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:52, 22 February 2024 (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.