Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cliff Turney

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. WjBscribe 18:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cliff Turney

Cliff Turney (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Deprodded, so listing here. No indication of notability. Darksun 19:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete: Non-notable, reads more like a VITA file. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 20:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - non-notable academic who probably, like the great mass of men, lived a life of quiet desperation. Eddie.willers 01:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Cliff Turney matches notability guidelines for a creative professional (academic). A world class researcher and administrator who oversaw Australia's Oldest University's newly formed Education Faculty. An influential figure who published much. An innovator in the field of Education influencing teacher praxis. An understanding of teacher education in NSW in the 70s and '80s is incomplete without knowledge of Cliff Turney. I don't think he should be confused with Spiderman ;)DDB 05:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. I think he is notable, and yes, this article needs (but deserves) a major clean up (and I'm willing to commit to starting that if this is kept). Even though Google doesn't yield hundreds of results, I believe that we should be able to find enough decent material to work with. --JoanneB 14:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Why only commit to cleaning up if the article is kept? If you believe that you can improve the article and assert it's notability, then you should do it now. I'm very willing to say keep if the article is improved and notability is demonstrated. --Darksun 03:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I understand your reasoning, and in the past, I've voted delete for articles that we should perhaps have an article about, but not in the current form. However, researching and editing takes time. I like doing it, but not so much when I know the article could be gone in mere days. When I commented, the discussion could still very easily go both ways, so I decided not jump into it before knowing my efforts would be worthwhile. --JoanneB 11:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Cliff Turney is certainly notable. But similarly to JoanneB's comment, I agree that the article needs a major clean up: at the moment it does indeed look like a list of dates, but that can be fixed. The page definitely needs to be here, just not in this form. matt.smart ^talk/contribs 14:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, but of course it needs to be wikified and generally cleaned up. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 14:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Reached here via Jimmy's page [1] :) In my opinion, the person meets the notability guidelines. However, some more information is required and over a period of time, it will surely have more information. Let us remember: stubs grow. --Bhadani (talk) 14:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - User:Ddball wants a chance to make the article better. Let him. WAS 4.250 14:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
• Provisional Keep - The article needs to assert notability better, but since it likely can, it shouldn't be deleted out of hand. If that occurs before closing, I would change to a strong keep - Crockspot 15:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - noone saying 'Keep' (other than DDB) has said HOW he is notable. I'm not denying nessecarily that he is, I just can't find any evidence of it. His publications seem limited and there are not many citations. "Cliff Turney" brings up about 50 Google results, of which maybe 30 are relevant - not an amazing number, especially considering some of these are just staff lists on the university website. "Turney, Cliff" brings up about 20 citations... I'm not sure if this is enough. WP:BIO lists the following criteria for notability of academics:

1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors. - This doesn't seem to be the case, based on the low number of Google hits (admittedly, not a conclusive test, but I don't have other ways of testing it)
2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. - Is he? Are details of the theory on Wikipedia? If so, it should be made clear in the article
3. The person has created a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. - Is there any significant independant analysis of his work?

If the notability can be shown, fine. There is still time left before the end of the AFD. However, I've yet to see any significant improvement to the article. --Darksun 03:23, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

• I think he meets the first criterion, probably not so much the latter two. His full name is "Clifford Turney", by the way, which yields some additional results. And take this quotation Cliff Turney put these principles into effect, not only in this University but also through his national profile as a reformer and scholar. His numerous books and other publications on teacher education were of the highest standard, and were complemented by his membership of several influential committees of inquiry into teacher education, his leadership of several academic and professional societies, and his work in editing scholarly journals. [2]. I acknowledge it is not from a fully independent source, yet even if you disregard the qualitative descriptions ('of the highest standard', etc.), judging from this and some of the other stuff I've read about him (his being a foundation dean of his faculty, for instance), he is at least as notable as many other academics we have articles on. --JoanneB 11:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

• • Hmm, well, with the results for 'Clifford Turney' it seems he is slightly better published than I first thought. I'm now bordering on thinking he satisfies notability, I'm still not convinced though. --Darksun 18:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - former Dean of Education at a major university like U. Sydney is pretty notable. Metamagician3000 12:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Darksun is involving himself with this article to a strong degree. In order to allow the article to stand and fall on its merit, I will be excusing myself from further involvement, and suggest Darksun do the same. DDB 11:40, 16 April 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.