This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Talk:Kenneth Carpenter is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
@Fanboyphilosopher: "The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work – either several extremely highly cited scholarly publications or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates.” please do so, I’m not seeing any extremely highly cited works on google scholar nor am I seeing a substantial number over 100 citations (I see a half dozen). Perhaps that is a lot considering the circumstances, I don’t have much expertise in Paleontology. What would you say is significant for this area? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:29, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, 100 on one paper is substantial and 100 on 6 is very substantial. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 22:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please clarify, the criteria is "extremely high” or “significant” with substantial referring to a quantity of articles with significant citation rates. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vertebrate Paleontology only has about 2,000 active academics and is a relatively low citation field. It is likely that he passes NAUTHOR, as he has written The Armored Dinosaurs (Life of the Past) and Eggs, Nests, and Baby Dinosaurs: A Look at Dinosaur Reproduction (Life of the Past) and edited Dinosaur Systematics: Approaches and Perspectives and Dinosaur Eggs and Babies which have been reviewed in various publications, Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:42, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hemiauchenia: Thanks for the input, that is almost an order of magnitude smaller than I thought the field was. Based on that and the book reviews I withdraw my notability objections. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
