Talk:Sarah A. Radcliffe

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notes[edit]

I simply do not believe this! Yet another puff for an obscure academic, and a geographer at that. Who is responsible for this? Is it the same person whose outrageous puffs are criticized elsewhere? See discussion about David Harvey, Derek Gregory and Michael Watts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.70.201.235 (talkcontribs)

This is a bit silly. A major academic is notable for certain audiences--particularly other academics. It does no harm to include an entry in them on Wikipedia. And in this specific case--and for David Harvey and Michael Watts (I'm not sure about Gregory)--the academics in question are widely read outside their discipline. 131.111.8.98 16:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not silly. I don't think even close friends of this particular entry would describe her as 'a major academic'. So the question remains: why does she have this entry? Contrary to the above inference, there is a promotional campaign afoot where Wikipedia entries for academic geographers are concerned. Until we know who the authors of such puffs are, and why they write them, the suspicion that they are the work of subordinates or clients will remain. 10 July 2007.

I have to agree that the notability is in question here. I am adding a notability tag to the article. There need to be more reliable, independent sources to point to significance. LogicalFinance33 (talk) 23:03, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]