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.
I speedied this article because there is no assertion of notability. As a professor, being published establishes absolutely no such notability, and is no such assertion. I have published works and a job at a university, as do hundreds (nay, thousands) of non-notable people. I would ask the admin in question to re-evaluate this decision. --Cheeser1 10:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
having published a book is an assertion of notability. i didnt say it was proof of notability. Read WP:CSD and the discussions on its talk page. Saying anything anyone could in good faith take as possible notability is an assertion of notability. Saying one is a professor--even assistant or associate-- is such an assertion, though most assistant and associate professors arent. But I'm going more by the books here. Saying one has published 5 books , 2 by a major university Press, is an unmistakable assertion. i dont regard this as even borderline in passing speedy.
I do use this with some degree of common sense: saying one has published a single clearly self-published book i do not treat as a credible assertion. Saying one is an instructor at a junior college ditto. Some of the people on the talk page interpret this even more flexibly & would consider those cases assertions. There is a difference between passing speedy, and passing AfD. I have no idea whether this would pass AfD. It would depend on the notability of the published works, Given that there a five books, two of them published apparently by Princeton University Press, i would say its a pretty good chance. It would depend for one thing on whom the other publishers are. Some reviews are needed to show it. The author deserves a chance to work on it, and this note will serve to explain what is needed. Reviews in RSs prove notability for authors. DGG (talk) 11:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I thank you for the explanation. While this does not appear to be an assertion of notability as I see it, I will defer to your judgment since it errs on the side of caution. However, I intend to AfD the article if notability is not established in a far more substantial way, because even if we decide to accept such as an assertion of notability, it doesn't seem very substantive to me. --Cheeser1 11:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
While it's obvious that not everyone with a job at a university is a notable academic in their field, nonetheless it ought to be equally obvious that one does not become a professor at Stanford without fulfilling that criterion. I'm removing the unreferenced tags as all the info currently provided in the article is verified in the sources given. DionysosProteus (talk) 14:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Excessively long article for someone without any business being on Wikipedia. But this is an ordinary thing, apparently. Are the professors making pages themselves or are students who liked them doing it?El cid, el campeador (talk) 17:03, 8 August 2016 (UTC)