Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peggy Kamuf

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 per consensus that WP:PROF criteria has been met. (closed by non-admin) RMHED (talk) 23:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peggy Kamuf

Peggy Kamuf (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A professor at USC and an English translator are the only claims to notability. I don't believe that to be enough. Jmlk17 04:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Kamuf has translated six books by one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century and holds a named chair at a major research institution. What on Earth does it take for a major academic to make it into Wikipedia, and why is it somehow harder for one to make it in than it is for a Pokemon? The Audient Void (talk) 04:16, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I overturned the speedy, so I abstain - but shouldn't we be giving stub creators more than half an hour to expand the article and add any potential sources/claims to notability before speedying/nominating for AfD? --krimpet⟲ 04:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Fails to meet WP:PROF. It was prod'd. But the creator removed the tag citing "obvious notability". [1] --Evb-wiki (talk) 04:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
    • She meets #s 3 and 4 via her translations and #6 via her named chair. The Audient Void (talk) 04:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • She won the American Comparative Literature Association's 2006 René Wellek Prize.[2] Note that the article on the organization describes the prize as "the most important award for comparative literature in the United States". So, um, yeah, she's notable. Picaroon (t) 04:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Ambivalent Unlike Marion Frances Chevalier Peggy Kamuf does appear in the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th editions of the Directory of American Scholars. However, so far as I could determine, she appears in no other academic biographical sources. --Bejnar (talk) 04:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
    • I am forced to conclude that your methods of evaluating the notability of academics are deeply flawed, in that case. The Audient Void (talk) 05:01, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep: Many of these google hits are sufficient, reliable source which can be added to the article to verify notability. I think this person meets WP:N. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:16, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - I'm curious why, if this article was created only today, it was not given a {{notability}} template tag. To me there are colorable claims to notability and a {{notability}} tag would give notice that those claims need to be fleshed out more. We have serious gaps in academic coverage and, unless one is an expert in the field and can assert non-notability, then it seems to me that a {{notability}} template is the better option. --Lquilter (talk) 05:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - One minute on a Google Scholar search [3] suggests notability to me. --Lquilter (talk) 05:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Named professor at important research university. Winner of "this country's most prestigious book award in the discipline of comparative literature" (given to one person every other year). Seems a clear pass of WP:PROF to me. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as per David Eppstein. --Crusio (talk) 09:08, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as very clearly notable per above. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Very definitely meets WP:PROF 4 and 6, and arguably 1. Hal peridol (talk) 00:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as fulfilling WP:PROF - Full professor, translator of Jacques Derrida, awards won. Bearian'sBooties (talk) 01:32, 26 November 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.