Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Jacobs (second nomination)

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 JoshuaZ 02:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Alan Jacobs

This article was previously listed for deletion on December 11, 2005, a few days after it was created. Two people commented and said "keep", and cleanup was suggested. Well it's been tagged for cleanup ever since, and four months ago someone added a "Notability" tag. It remains an orphan.

If it hadn't been listed for deletion before I would have simply slapped a proposed deletion (PROD) tag on it and forgotten about it. But it has, so here we are. I suggest that we delete this poorly written, poorly sourced orphan biography of a living person. --Tony Sidaway 14:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete — Notability is not established. Also, I know WP:GOOGLEHITS applies, but I received no hits on MSN, Ask Jeeves, Google, or Yahoo. ~ ΜΛGиυs ΛΠιмυМ ≈ √∞ 21:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep There are said to be multiple works on social science--in Scopus I find: one in the New Republic:, apparently 1 page long, one in a peer-reviewd journal, Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law,'cited 13 times, and 4 in the journal he edits, IDEA. (details added to article) As for his journal, IDEA, it is an on-line journal, ISSN 1523-1712, that has published between 1 and 4 articles a year since 1996--but it is in scopus, which gives it some degree of respectability. The award claimed is given by the International Transactional Analysis Association,which is listed in the WP article for I'm OK, You're OK, and several other WP articles refer to people who have received it. I have no information on the notability of the photographs. I think all in all it adds up to weak notability. DGG 22:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 17:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. I don't think there is enough info to remove the 'notability' tag! He does not have the publication record you would expect of a full professor, and I agree we should keep full professors by DGG's standard. He holds no announced academic position, and he lists no publications since 1998. Two of the pubs found by DGG (mentioned above) are by different men also named Alan Jacobs, so I removed them. Note that his personal web site (which I have added to the article) includes a list of his publications. I agree that the award he received counts in his favor. EdJohnston 18:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Publishing in the journal you edit was not what WP:PROF had in mind; and which of these contributors to IDEA is well known - outside the editor's mind, that is? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree about that, which is why I mentioned it; however, being editor in chief of a reputable academic (or other) journal has usually amounted to notability, and this is one factor. Whether the journal is important enough is not obvious--if it's in a major index like Scopus, it has some degree of respectability. It's in Ulrich's also, it's print as well as online, been published since 1966, & is primarily devoted to Holocaust and genocide studies. [http/www.ideajournal.com/] He is not the major contributor. I frankly don't know how to evaluate people who have a little bit of notability in several dimensions, none of them sufficient in themselves. DGG 05:21, 8 June 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.