Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert B. Jones (linguist)

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. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 01:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robert B. Jones (linguist)[edit]

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

Queried speedy delete Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems to meet the notability guideline for academics; the article makes a reasonably strong case that his research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline of Tibeto-Burman comparative linguistics. Not sure why anyone would imagine this was a speedy candidate. And that episode where he found that artifact in the temple and was chased by Nazis got some attention. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 21:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - His memorial makes a better case for his notability than the article does, but even without that the volume of cited publications in the article would almost certainly carry him over WP:ACADEMIC criterion 1. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:55, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question The biggest cite on GS is 11 for his book. Is this enough? Xxanthippe (talk) 01:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

From his memorial, which is published by the university and I would accept as a consensus of his peers: "His Ph.D. dissertation was a descriptive and historical study of the major languages in the Karen language family (Sgaw, Pho, and Pa’o), spoken in Burma and Thailand. [...] The resulting study was published in the University of California linguistic series as Karen Linguistic Studies. This monograph is among the most thoroughgoing studies of any Tibeto-Burman language and is still the most authoritative single-volume study of the Karen family." Satisfies WP:ACADEMIC criterion 1: "The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources." - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:30, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't gone through this systematically, but GS says Karen Linguistic Studies has 38 cites. --Chris Johnson (talk) 03:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

His papers have been acquired by Cornell University and are now part of the rare books and manuscripts collection. If a university library considers the rubish someone leaves at death worthy of indefinate storage in a publically accessible archive, the university at any event seems to regard him as important. http://rmc.library.cornell.edu/ead/htmldocs/RMM04901.html Tibetologist (talk) 15:05, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I am persuaded by emerging evidence. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:31, 12 November 2009 (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.