Talk:Francis Saviour Farrugia

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

Philosophy: Philosophers / Ethics / Social and political / Modern Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophers
	Ethics
	Social and political philosophy
	Modern philosophy

Malta Low‑importance

	Malta portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malta, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malta on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MaltaWikipedia:WikiProject MaltaTemplate:WikiProject MaltaMalta articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

File:Francis Saviour Farrugia.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Francis Saviour Farrugia.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:25, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Philosopher or penologist?

Without going into the matter whether this biography satisfies WP:NOTABILITY (probably not), based on the little that he wrote, Farrugia is a penologist not a philosopher. Any other views? Demdem (talk) 07:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Considering Maltese history and its limited application that argument could be used for almost anything. And yet - Wikipedia should be comprehensive, and the inclusion of any and all information that is interesting, well referenced and relevant must be encouraged. Keep on keeping on! 46.11.30.197 (talk) 21:49, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with providing some information about a person who's not an non-entity and might be of interest to someone looking him up on Wikipedia? Farrugia's inclusion certainly satisfies WP:BIO in that he is sufficiently interesting to deserve attention or to be recorded. His exclusion would be a mistake. Moreover, why can't Farrugia be both a penologist and a philosopher? In the 18^th century the distinction would have made perfect sense since the 'specialisation' (or 'professionalisation') phase of philosophy had not began yet. Today, perhaps, we would have judged otherwise, and this might be the reason why Farrugia's name does not feature in the main article of Philosophy in Malta. Nonetheless, failing to recognise a competence which in Farrugia's day would have been more than appropriate would be a historical blunder. Furthermore, the article offers sufficient information on Farrugia to keep his contribution in perspective. Merely stating that he was only a penologist will not do him justice. As one can easily note, Farrugia's contribution is wider in scope than an 18^th century penologist would deal with. Besides, his logical methodology in dealing with his chosen themes (1778) is philosophical, which, in the last analysis, is what counts here. In other words, the qualification 'philosopher' (and a minor one at that) adds something significant to 'penologist' which is worth noting. --Katafore (talk) 06:27, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]