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 speedy keep. From the opposition, it is argued that notability is clearly established through Google Scholar. I believe that based on the impact of the subject's works, notability is established. I have no prejudice against speedy renomination, however. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 22:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Hogg[edit]

Michael Hogg (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)

Tagged for notability for 5 years; couldn't establish notability Boleyn (talk) 21:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 14:58, 16 January 2013 (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.