Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Dapra

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 delete. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Dapra

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not finding evidence of a pass of WP:GNG or WP:NBIO based on included sources & search. Article appears to read like an advertisement. ASUKITE 17:08, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, Business, and United States of America. ASUKITE 17:08, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Authors. ASUKITE 17:26, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The subject is a professor with years of corporate experience and founder of multiplecompanies. As a professor, he also qualfies for article 2 of WP:NACADEMIC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shender1 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 23 February 2023 (UTC) — Shender1 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete I could not find the required significant coverage from multiple independent reliable sources to meet our notability guidelines. The subject also fails WP:NACADEMIC. I disagree with Shender1, since the Rosenblum Endowed Professorship is not a "highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level". --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 18:50, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

’’’Keep””l found several academic articles, a published book, and other articles that meet guidelines. I think the Rosenblum scholarship should be edited to remove highly prestigious. It clearly is an honor at the university and University System of NH. It needs counts. User)Profones77 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profjines77 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 23 February 2023 (UTC) — Profjines77 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Reliable sources must be independent from the subject to help establish notability. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 19:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Care to share any of those articles and books? We can't just take your word for it. -- asilvering (talk) 20:00, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

apologies I should have been more thorough I appreciate you pointing out my mistake here are some results I quickly found.

a search of recommended scholar works shows an internationally published book on leadership and research works or contributions.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Jonathan+Dapra%22

Also, a general search showed several blog posts as a contributor: https://corp.smartbrief.com/original/2020/12/navigating-road-doer-leader

it was noted he blogs from https://www.alaricpartners.com/blog

and I saw three published articles on teaching and engagement at The Teching Professor with various co-authors:

https://www.teachingprofessor.com/author/tp-wratcher-dapra/

https://www.teachingprofessor.com/topics/teaching-strategies/blended-flipped/informal-assessment-activities-for-blended-and-online-courses/

I think this backs up his University bio and the statement in the article Profjines77 (talk) 02:07, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, none of these are helpful for passing WP:NPROF. I'm not sure what guidelines you think they meet? These are things that he has written or contributed to. What we would need to establish WP:NPROF is that other academics have written about him or his work. -- asilvering (talk) 03:33, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As far as I can tell, he has an h-index of... 0. Not even remotely close to a pass of WP:NPROF. -- asilvering (talk) 20:03, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~
as noted in the Wikipedia guidelines:
- Citation measures such as the h-index, g-index, etc., are of limited usefulness in evaluating whether Criterion 1 is satisfied. They should be approached with caution because their validity is not, at present, completely accepted, and they may depend substantially on the citation database used. They are also discipline-dependent; some disciplines have higher average citation rates than others.
Profjines77 (talk) 02:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's about deleting articles because you think an h-index isn't where it should be, not because there is no apparent evidence of any citations at all. -- asilvering (talk) 03:32, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment a large chunk of the education and career section is an extremely close paraphrase of biography at [1], which site carries a copyright symbol and no obvious get out. I'm not a copyright expert but strikes me as nearly speediable? Elemimele (talk) 21:26, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. An assistant professor with no citations to his work comes nowhere near any of the criteria of WP:PROF, and, as Elemimele points out, our article is a copyright violation. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:49, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No evidence of notability for NPROF and it seems the University where he got his PhD was a for profit business that was basically running a scam (or as noted by the attorney general "engaged in deceptive marketing practices.") on their students and is closed now. Overall not great accolades and I dont think that the named chair [2] he holds would fulfill Criterion 5 as a "a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research". --hroest 14:56, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, that sort of named chair does not go to an assistant professor. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a mischaracterization.this is a bias not based in fact. Although the University ultimately closed and some programs questions, the Argosy business school was fully-accredited by WASC regional and also, had ACBSP accreditation for its doctoral programs. I taught there and I will say that the end was a business debacle with a sale to the Dream Center, the degree is more than credible. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/argosy-university-awarded-accreditation-of-its-business-programs-300096306.html T. kemp Profjines77 (talk) 02:52, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Obvious fail of WP:ACADEMIC, does not come even close to meeting any of the eight criteria for notability. A non-notable academic holding a minor position in academia and without any hint of an a academic publication record. PhD from a sham university that has been closed down. Probable copyright violations. Jeppiz (talk) 00:06, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
personal bias in calling a degree a sham university. As noted above— accredited by WASC (thus able to receive Federal funds(p) and also, business-specific accrediting by ACBSP - https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/argosy-university-awarded-accreditation-of-its-business-programs-300096306.html T Kemp Profjines77 (talk) 02:56, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to strike the "keep" you've written on all three of your replies. Right now it looks like you've tried to !vote four times. -- asilvering (talk) 05:02, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have done so myself and also removed additional !vote above the title. @Profjines77: Please feel free to remove the extra keep !votes. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:55, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I came upon this page because I follow the guy. He is a well-known businessman and a leadership consultant. He has spoken at my company. You keep talking about him purely as an academic, I would categorize him as a businessperson first and foremost. Then as an author. I read his bio at his company www.alaricpartners.com/about and it is similar to what is written on his university page This appears to be reasonably paraphrased, not plagiarized. I think he is more than notable–thus my surprise there was this note above his page. I type his name into Google and his book and other stuff come up for multiple pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.112.154.233 (talk) 12:41, 25 February 2023 (UTC) — 24.112.154.233 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
If he is notable as a well-known businessman and a leadership consultant can you please give us some independent reliable sources showing that? The ones in the article are a press release by his company, two academic sources confirming that he is an assistant professor and a book written by, rather than about, the subject. I can find nothing better. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:12, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We're looking at him as an academic in the replies here because none of us have any disagreement to make with the nominator about the subject's failure on WP:GNG and WP:BIO counts. The nominator didn't mention the subject's academic notability or lack thereof, so others have looked into it. He obviously does not meet those guidelines either. -- asilvering (talk) 04:50, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The flagrant WP:BLUDGEON violations by a few WP:SPA accounts here are highly suspicious, as is the IP whose only Wiki-contribution is to vote "keep" here. For all the bludgeoning by the SPAs , the fact remains that there is no notability whatsoever (as every established user has pointed out). Jeppiz (talk) 17:57, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question: he is a "named professor" at Plymouth State. Does this qualify for NACADEMIC Criteria No.  5, (named chair or distinguished professor appointments) as an alternative title for determining notability under NACADEMIC? BhamBoi (talk) 06:50, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. -- asilvering (talk) 06:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply above and note 5b of WP:PROF. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, the guidance for WP:NPROF C5 says it "can be applied reliably only for persons who are tenured at the full professor level, and not for junior faculty members with endowed appointments." (It is also somewhat doubtful that Plymouth State is "major" for this purpose.) Russ Woodroofe (talk) 13:21, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. Neither the notability guideline for academics nor any other relevant standard are met. Changing a major developer of digital effects and Photoshop plugins to a leading developer of digital effects and Photoshop plugins is not how to write; it is thinly recycling promotional glurge. Kill it with fire. XOR'easter (talk) 22:39, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Heavily promotional, with no evidence of notability as an academic, author, or businessperson. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:23, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:11, 28 February 2023 (UTC).[reply]
Delete or userfy per WP:TOOSOON. He is only an assistant professor, which we hardly ever keep per WP:PROF. His first book was published three weeks ago. In 2023, everyone knows we are not a free web host for up and coming management gurus. A for-profit college is not necessarily a sham (disclosure: I used to work in the field), but neither is where he earned his doctorate nor where he teaches especially recognized. ~Zero h-index and close copying are red flags. Bearian (talk)
Delete per above fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:45, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.