Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian St. John (historian)

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 Delete --Allen3 ^talk 10:51, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ian St. John (historian)

Vanity page. — 12.207.151.144 8 July 2005 15:44 (UTC)

Keep: a valid page about an interesting author, who shows much promise. Setokaiba 8 July 2005 16:44 (UTC)

Keep: an encyclopedic page with information on a valid author and historian Newmhost 11:51, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

• DeleteAbstain temporarily. The book the article claims he coauthored is here, only he didn't coauthor it according to Amazon. Thus no claim to notability. High school teachers are not inherently notable (even if their school apparently always must be), and the list of unpublished things doesn't count. The journal publications fail the professor test, too and are likely just those he got as part of his PhD. -Splash 07:25, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Amazon have updated their listing, although I wonder why his name is not on the cover. User talk:Newmhost contains a message saying that his name does appear on the title page of the book however.
• Delete per Splash. --KFP 08:20, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Delete I was going to vote to keep on the grounds that he wrote a biography of Kinnock, an important figure, but it looks as if he didn't. PatGallacher 11:22, 2005 July 17 (UTC)

I have looked at new information put forward, and the Amazon site, I see him on UK Amazon but can't find this book on US Amazon. I still sense something fishy about this, at most he played a secondary role helping Westlake, who is an established writer of books on recent British and European politics, outside his normal field of 19th century British politics. Not very notable, still delete. PatGallacher 08:43, 2005 July 23 (UTC)

• Delete It looks like CV embellishment indeed. With verified contribution to the biography it migth be different. As it is, non-notable fraud. Lomedae 12:21, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep I have heard of him. Its unlikely to be him creating the article. Delete The one I have heard of is Ian St. John ~~~~ 20:11, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete questionable notability/verifiability. --Etacar11 00:18, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Ok, Amazon now lists him as co-author of the book, but I still don't think he's notable enough. --Etacar11 17:50, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, I'm struggling a bit here too. He's listed as a co-author, but not on the cover of the book. What did he do? And Amazon aren't the only ones who make the authorship mistake, either, which could just be a publisher's error I suppose. -Splash 18:45, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non notable, possible vanity hoax. JamesBurns 03:42, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non notable. Elfguy 17:23, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Renata3 08:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

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.