Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alvin Goldfarb
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. Mangojuicetalk 17:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Alvin Goldfarb
Article does not assert the notability of the subject. Besides being the current president of a midwestern University, how else is he notable? Is being University president make him inherently notable? Methinks not, but I welcome thoughts. Seinfreak37 21:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. The president of an accredited university is usually notable both as an academic administrator and as a scholar. In this case, Goldfarb passes WP:PROF as the author of several textbooks which have each been through multiple editions. --Eastmain 01:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Looking at WP:PROF, I don't see that being "the author of several textbooks which have been through multiple editions" is one of the criteria. Pan Dan 14:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- "Widely used textbook" is one of the criteria in numbered item 1 of WP:PROF. Several editions is evidence for the widely used part. —David Eppstein 14:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- No, it's not a criterion, it's listed as an "example"; and it says "An academic who has published ... a widely used textbook ... is likely to be notable as an author (see WP:BIO)" (my emphasis). I think this is generally wrong; however in this case we don't have to argue about whether it's wrong in general, because it just says "likely" to pass WP:BIO so we just have to check whether in this particular case WP:BIO is satisfied. So the question here is, have his books been the subject of "multiple independent reviews" as suggested by WP:BIO? Pan Dan 15:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- In case the above sounds like wikilawyering, I just want to add that the question here, as always with authors, is whether there are sources that are about him or about his publications, that are independent of him and of his employers and publishers, so we can use those sources to write a verified NPOV article. Pan Dan 15:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- "Widely used textbook" is one of the criteria in numbered item 1 of WP:PROF. Several editions is evidence for the widely used part. —David Eppstein 14:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Looking at WP:PROF, I don't see that being "the author of several textbooks which have been through multiple editions" is one of the criteria. Pan Dan 14:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 05:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. What Eastmain said. —David Eppstein 06:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- PS. Four news articles about Goldfarb himself, and quotes from him in three more. And another set of news articles, partly overlapping. —David Eppstein 16:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. He's prominent in his community, that's certain. And, yes, we can verify certain details about his professional life, and I have added some of those to the article. But Wikipedia is not, as a NYT article once misdescribed us, an online who's-who. There's no profile of him (or of the admittedly "widely used" textbooks that he only co-edited) that we could use to write a Wikipedia article about him or his publications. Pan Dan 13:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- Clear Keep per Eastmain and David Eppstein, Pete.Hurd 14:54, 19 March 2007 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
