Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brent Shaw

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. -- BD2412 ^talk 20:14, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Brent Shaw

Non-notable vanity page. It appears to be true that he did write one published book review, but considering also that a google search of "brent shaw" + University of Lethbridge (to get rid of false positives for this presumably common name) gives 23 hits, it does not establish notability. Delete. --Dmcdevit 00:01, July 13, 2005 (UTC) Eeks! I'm certainly not happy about this nomination. I should have researched it more fully, (Amazon next time as well as Google). Thanks for the catch, and I'm blushing brightly in front of my computer screen. (In my own defense, I was finishing up someone else's nomination, and so gave it less thought than I normally would have). Speedy keep and bonk the nominator on the head (speedily). --Dmcdevit·t 08:03, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete nn per nominator. If he had written one published book that would be different. -Splash 01:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. Forbsey 01:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. A professor who has produced eight pages of published work in 11 years probably should worry more about keeping his job than about his placement in WP. Okay, he published a little more than that but I still vote Delete. Publishing in one's field is a requirement for a professor, not an accomplishment. To be encyclopedic, one should have to be regarded as a special authority in that field; otherwise, one is just an academic. Dcarrano 01:21, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, has made a significant contribution to the study of "Environment and Society in Roman North Africa" [1]. Of course you get a low number of google hits when using an extremely restricted search, it's not a valid test. Kappa 01:40, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Appears to have written one book, edited at least one other, according to Amazon. [2] Expand and cleanup, though. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:56, 2005 July 13 (UTC)
• Keep based on amazon.com findings and expand article. Postdlf 03:10, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, is noteable; expand. Phoenix2 04:57, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Weak Keep due to amazon. Benna 05:16, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, per comments by Dcarrano. Writing one book just isn't that notable for an academic. —Cleared as filed. 05:46, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
• More than one, if this item from the Princeton Weekly is any indication:

Shaw will come to Princeton from the University of Pennsylvania, where he has been a professor since 1996. From 1995 to 1996 and from 1989 to 1990, he was a visiting professor of Greek and Roman history at Princeton. For 15 years, starting in 1977, he taught at the University of Lethbridge in Canada.

Specializing in Roman history, religion and material culture, Shaw's books include Spartacus and the Slave Wars: A Brief History with Documents, published by St. Martin's Press in 2001; and Variorum editions of Environment and Society in Roman North Africa and Rulers, Nomads and Christians in Roman North Africa, published in 1995. He earned his B.A. from the University of Alberta and his Ph.D. from Cambridge University.

• I say keep. --Calton | Talk 06:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable historian with a number of published books on Roman history. Capitalistroadster 06:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable academic with several published works. And don't just use Amazon, use library catalogues. All the catalogues of all the best and largest libraries in the world (Library of Congress, British Library, Bibliothèque national de France, all national and major university libraries in Europe and North America etc.) are freely available over the net. This is not just directed at the nominator in this case, but to everybody who makes nominations of this kind or votes on them. This should really be in the instructions somewhere. Uppland 08:48, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. It does appear that this is a notable authority in his field. Daedalus-Prime 13:44, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, this is a notable authority. MicahMN | Talk 18:37, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Arevich 20:54, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, this figure is a notable historian within his field. Hall Monitor 22:31, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. If the New Republic allowed him to write on their magazine why not include him in wikipedia as well? --Vizcarra 22:40, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I echo the above users' reasons as to why. Kojangee July 15th, 2005 19:51 Beijing Time

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.