Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tripp York
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 no consensus. Hersfold (t/a/c) 06:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tripp York[edit]
- Tripp York (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
A professor at a private University, the subject fails WP:PROF and WP:AUTHOR. There are no relevant relaiable sources who cover the subject, and there are no relevant Google News hits. The only references in the article are to a small religious ethics website on which the subject writes, and do not demonstrate notability. – Toon(talk) 01:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 07:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 07:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 07:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Could not find enough to establish notability under WP:PROF. Does not seem to pass WP:BIO either. He may meet WP:PROF in the future if he continues publishing or one of his current books (e.g., The Purple Crown) becomes notable. Not there yet though, in my opinion.--Eric Yurken (talk) 01:31, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - couple brief publications in academic databases. No evidence of coverage in reliable sources. Jlg4104 (talk) 02:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Full professor at a very good university, Elon University, "ranked as one of the top southern master's-level universities by USNWR". 4 books, 1 by a university press. DGG (talk) 18:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Ordinary professors fail WP:PROF (the notability guideline for academics) unless they hold a named chair or distinguished professorship position, or they have made a significant impact upon their area of study. There is no evidence of this. Just about every professor has published books. There's no evidence that this guy passes WP:N either, with no significant coverage evidenced, or seemingly available. – Toon(talk) 18:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- they don't fail, its just that stating it is not sufficient in an article (unlike such posts where it is). All full professors at research universities have been found notable here, for they invariably can be shown to be an expert in their field. . Now, this does not apply to Elon,so it has to be shown by the publications also. But the quality of the place does make a difference. DGG (talk) 00:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep-- His book Calculated futures is listed in 260 libraries including Princeton and Yale. 1. Another one is listed in Harvard, Columbia, Pricenton, etc 2. The subject is an expert in his area of research, no doubt about it. --J.Mundo (talk) 20:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been listed as an Anarchism task force deletion discussion.
- 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.