Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victor Shepherd: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
HagermanBot (talk | contribs)
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 8: Line 8:
::'''Disagree''' Pete Hurd is citing a proposed guideline;[[WP:PROF]] has not been adopted and is heavilly disputed. The current professor test at BIO states: ''"If the individual is more well known and more published than an average college professor (based on the U.S. practice of calling all full-time academics professors), they can and should be included."''--[[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] 00:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
::'''Disagree''' Pete Hurd is citing a proposed guideline;[[WP:PROF]] has not been adopted and is heavilly disputed. The current professor test at BIO states: ''"If the individual is more well known and more published than an average college professor (based on the U.S. practice of calling all full-time academics professors), they can and should be included."''--[[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] 00:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
:::I see no evidence that [[WP:PROF]] is "heavily disupted". To the contrary, a quick look through [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators]] shows it to be the accepted standard for academics. [[User:Pete.Hurd|Pete.Hurd]] 05:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
:::I see no evidence that [[WP:PROF]] is "heavily disupted". To the contrary, a quick look through [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators]] shows it to be the accepted standard for academics. [[User:Pete.Hurd|Pete.Hurd]] 05:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
:::: Pete, please read the tag at the top of the page for [[WP:PROF]]: '''"The following is a proposed Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption. References or links to this page should not describe it as "policy".''' <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] ([[User talk:Kevin Murray|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kevin Murray|contribs]]) 08:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
::::* Pete, please read the tag at the top of the page for [[WP:PROF]]: ''"The following is a proposed Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption. References or links to this page should not describe it as "policy".''--[[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] 08:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
::::* [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators]] is not WP policy. It is an opinion statement by a group of Wikipedians. You've been duped! --[[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] 08:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' From the information provided in the article, this particular professor does not meet notability requirements. I have several professors at my graduate school who have done much more than this person and still don't merit having articles of their own. If some sources can be provided that show that his books are notable then I'd be willing to change my 'vote' to keep. --[[User:The Way|The Way]] 00:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' From the information provided in the article, this particular professor does not meet notability requirements. I have several professors at my graduate school who have done much more than this person and still don't merit having articles of their own. If some sources can be provided that show that his books are notable then I'd be willing to change my 'vote' to keep. --[[User:The Way|The Way]] 00:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' Passes professor test absolutely and seems to make it as an author as well. He only needs to pass one test to be deemed notable. I see a review of his work by an independent source, and a biography at another independent source. What's the problem? --[[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] 00:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' Passes professor test absolutely and seems to make it as an author as well. He only needs to pass one test to be deemed notable. I see a review of his work by an independent source, and a biography at another independent source. What's the problem? --[[User:Kevin Murray|Kevin Murray]] 00:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:12, 21 January 2007

Victor Shepherd (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)

non-notable biography. Article asserts no real encyclopedic value; seems to be just another university prof, and an adjunct at that. Agent 86 06:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree Pete Hurd is citing a proposed guideline;WP:PROF has not been adopted and is heavilly disputed. The current professor test at BIO states: "If the individual is more well known and more published than an average college professor (based on the U.S. practice of calling all full-time academics professors), they can and should be included."--Kevin Murray 00:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see no evidence that WP:PROF is "heavily disupted". To the contrary, a quick look through Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators shows it to be the accepted standard for academics. Pete.Hurd 05:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete From the information provided in the article, this particular professor does not meet notability requirements. I have several professors at my graduate school who have done much more than this person and still don't merit having articles of their own. If some sources can be provided that show that his books are notable then I'd be willing to change my 'vote' to keep. --The Way 00:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep Passes professor test absolutely and seems to make it as an author as well. He only needs to pass one test to be deemed notable. I see a review of his work by an independent source, and a biography at another independent source. What's the problem? --Kevin Murray 00:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To establish notability you need multiple reviews, the article supplies only one and that one source is rather non-notable itself. Also, there is no independent biography; I believe the biography you consider to be independent is a biography on a Writer's Union website, in other words that biography is likely to have been submitted by Victor himself since he is a member of that union. This is supported by the fact that that biography gives Victor's email address for responses... --The Way 01:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're right and wrong (a) he doesn't have to pass all tests; the multiple reviews is just one test. The Professor Test has different criteria (b) from what you say the Writer's Union website may not be an independent source. --Kevin Murray 08:02, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]