Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Jayne Orser

Add links
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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:12, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Jayne Orser[edit]

Barbara Jayne Orser (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Searches do not indicate any reason that this academic meets the notability requirements outlined at WP:PROF. All sources listed here are publications by the subject or are affiliated with the subject and therefore fail to establish notability.  InsertCleverPhraseHere  20:18, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

She is a valid professional. Her book is approved on Wikipedia and she is an expert in her field. She meets the criteria of notability and interest. She is not, herself, an academic subject, so how would she be referenced by others? Her work is peer-reviewed and she deserves a bio on wikipedia, given that her book is there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinjsp (talk • contribs) 20:23, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

She and Catherine Elliott are responsible for all of this:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinjsp (talk • contribs) 20:26, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

She is also proven here as an academic:

Also, she is noted as one of Canada's most powerful women!

Please see WP:PROF for information on what criteria are necessary for the notability of professors and academics. In what i can see she meets none of the specific guidelines outlined there and also fails to meet the general notability guideline (WP:GNG).  InsertCleverPhraseHere  20:29, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Top 'X' lists and articles published by the university she works at do not establish notability. She exists but does not seem to be WP:NOTABLE.  InsertCleverPhraseHere  20:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria[edit source] Shortcut: WP:NACADEMIC Academics/professors meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, are notable. Academics/professors meeting none of these conditions may still be notable if they meet the conditions of WP:BIO or other notability criteria, and the merits of an article on the academic/professor will depend largely on the extent to which it is verifiable. Before applying these criteria, see the General notes and Specific criteria notes sections, which follow.

1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.

  • The Telfer School of Management at the University of Ottawa congratulates Barbara Orser, for being announced as a recipient of the prestigious 2010 Canada's Most Powerful Women: Top 100™ Awards, in the Champions category. [1]

3. The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society for which that is a highly selective honor (e.g., the IEEE).

4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.

5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon).

  • She was a former Vice-Dean of the Business Faculty (Telfer) at the University of Ottawa (one of Canada's top 15 universities)

6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society.

7. The person has made substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.

8. The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area.

9. The person is in a field of literature (e.g., writer or poet) or the fine arts (e.g., musician, composer, artist), and meets the standards for notability in that art, such as WP:CREATIVE or WP:MUSIC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinjsp (talk • contribs) 20:48, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.telfer.uottawa.ca/en/latest-news/470-professor-barbara-orser-named-among-canadas-most-powerful-women
Top 'X' awards are not "highly prestigious academic awards or honours" by any stretch of the definition. As for the Vice dean appointment, this does not represent a named chair, or distinguished professor appointment.  InsertCleverPhraseHere  21:14, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well then maybe you should be looking for all professor articles and deleting them. This one has been there for a longtime and you haven't flagged it for deletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Strangelove He's MUCH less notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinjsp (talk • contribs) 21:39, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should be less concerned with what I am or am not doing, and concentrate on the subject at hand.  InsertCleverPhraseHere  21:50, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment You will find more information if you search under "Barbara Orser." I found some references which I added to the article. Also, she has some publications on Google Scholar. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Most of the 'references' are articles by the subject. Two refs require login. The other two are from her employer's website: one of those states that she was a 'most powerful woman' six years ago. Web search and search tools included with this RfD turn up zilch. Refs fail WP:R, and subject fails WP:N. Keep Meets WP:NACADEMIC. Tapered (talk) 02:12, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a collection of sources by the employers of the subject and of works by the subject are not enough to pass notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:06, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Named professorship = notability per WP:NACADEMIC. Her title is "Deloitte Professor in the Management of Growth Enterprises". Unless "Deloitte" has some sort of meaning like "tenured" that I've not come across, that sure looks like a distinguished professorship. Given the article is not problematic/promotional enough to need WP:TNT, that would seem to be that, no? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:17, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:19, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:19, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. A named professorship meets WP:PROF#C5, although I'm leery about it being at a business school and she doesn't appear meet any of the other criteria or the GNG. Joe Roe (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conclusive Keep. The article may be short on refs and such, but Orser meets at least 2 of the named criteria in WP:PROF: c1 (impact) based on h-index of 21 (see link above furnished by Megalibrarygirl, who modestly refers to these as "some publications"), which is rather high in the business world, and c5 (named chair) as the Deloitte Professor of Management. The article itself needs some cleanup (e.g. could use an infobox), but there is simply no question that Orser meets WP notability requirements. Agricola44 (talk) 14:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Based on the information given by Agricola and Rhododendrites, I agree. When I presented the info, I was on the fence, since I'm more used to working with GNG arguments rather than PROF. As for Tapered, the references that require log ins don't invalidate them as sources. What I usually do when I can see the full source is look at where the source is coming from (is it a RS?) and read the abstract. Sometimes other Wikipedians will have access to the databases and can help you out if you ask. ;) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- appears to meet WP:NPROF. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep and I nearly closed this myself as the nominator is both misunderstanding WP:PROF in that she has a Vice Dean position at a notable university, that by far satsfies WP:PROF; she also then satisfies WP:AUTHOR by having over a 1,000 library holdings as shown by WorldCat, certainly enough. The Delete votes (now 1) are not emphasizing this. SwisterTwister talk 06:47, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the sources are convincing that WP:NPROF is passed. Atlantic306 (talk) 18:09, 17 September 2016 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Barbara_Jayne_Orser&oldid=1089513597"