Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francisco Gil-White

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. - Mailer Diablo 02:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Francisco Gil-White

Nominated for deletion on the grounds that the subject doesn't meet the notability criteria set out at Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria. He has published a small number of papers plus two online books that he has self-published on his own website, having apparently not found a publisher for them. According to the article, his main claims to fame are that he has extensively promoted controversial political and historical assertions (note that he is an anthropologist/psychologist, not an historian or political scientist) and that he was allegedly sacked by the University of Pennsylvania for his political activities. He seems to be a fringe figure at best. -- ChrisO 20:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Very Weak Keep They do fail the criteria, but that doesn't mean they're not noteable. He does have a list of papers published in some respectable journals (Oxford). But I don't know if I can trust it since most of the references are from his website. Definately needs more sources, if none can be provided, delete. --MECU≈talk 23:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. The subject may have written some papers, but he's never had a book published. The only sources are from his own sites. I did a more thorough search and found little more to establish his notability. We can always restore the article if he becomes more notable. -Will Beback 00:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Wait. I assured the person who originally flagged this entry that a colleague of mine would be providing a section on Gil-White's influence in Anthropology/Psychology/Evolutionary Biology that would establish his notability. Furthermore, I believe he does satisfy at least one of the Notability guidelines for academics 81.129.153.28 01:31, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
How much time is need to add this material? -Will Beback 04:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Which criterion do you believe he satisfies? -- ChrisO 08:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
About a week - and I believe he is both considered an expert in his particular field, and has been widely published in many reputable places including, for example, Oxford and MIT press. 81.129.153.28 12:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
This AfD is scheduled to run another several days. Evidence of expertise would be citations from other authors, or mentions in journals, etc about him. Surely some of those are at hand? -Will Beback 15:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Wikipedia itself links to one of his articles on the Israel-Lebanon conflict[1] article. The.valiant.paladin 18:04, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
It shouldn't do - his website patently doesn't qualify for inclusion. See WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided. -- ChrisO 23:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 16:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Some users suggested a week ago that new material would be added to establish the subject's notability. No new material has been added since then. Will it be forthcoming? -Will Beback 17:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak delete per comments. Has User:81.129.153.28 provided any evidence of notibility yet? --HResearcher 11:16, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately not so far. -- ChrisO 11:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep this researcher is often quoted in the race and intelligence debate, especially here on Wikipedia, has made the news when his university decided not to renew his contract and in essence decided not to let him teach his course (whereas students put together a petition enjoining the university to let him teach). This character is steeped in controversy, but at the same time, notable for his opinions and academic contributions. Google returns 21,300 hits for "Francisco Gil-White". What more is needed to assure notability? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramdrake (talk • contribs)
  • Delete as per nom and above Bwithh 00:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep A simple search of google books shows he is regularly cited in physical publications with regard to race. If his article is deleted, fringe "scientists" funded by the Pioneer Fund should also be considered for deletion. I believe he is being attacked for his vigorous criticism of Pioneer Fund and pro-hereditarian scholars. On the Talk:Race and intelligence page, his criticisms have been downplayed, and he has been characterized as a "vanity website" guy, in a clear attempt to remove his criticisms from the record. --JereKrischel 03:54, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep As per JereKrischel.Ultramarine 13:21, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep Gil-White is an established acedemic, not a "fringe figure" as someone here has suggested. Please refer to his impressive [returns on google scholar]. Central to a claim for notablility is the importance of his work on the evolution of prestige based hierarchies. This work has had a tremendous impact on the evolutionary psychology / memetics communities. His paper on prestige in Evolution and Human Behavior has been cited in respectable journals 99 times in the past four years. I will add more detailed content to the main article about his work on the evolution of prestige later today. Cmart 15:35, 7 August 2006 (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.