Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Christian Hackett

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) Cavarrone 14:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

William Christian Hackett[edit]

[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 notable. Appears to be promotional. Pprsmv (talk) 15:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~. Likely autobiography. I found a capsule review of Quiet powers of the possible (ProQuest 1807074607) and a review of his co-translation of Wahl (ProQuest 2371191098). Outside the Gates does not appear to be notable; I couldn't find any significant independent coverage of it. This falls short of WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NACADEMIC in my opinion. Jfire (talk) 16:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quiet Powers seems highly notable in the field of Continental Philosophy. Besides the review noted, I located scholarly reviews here and here:

ffrench, Patrick. Review of Quiet Powers of the Possible: Interviews in Contemporary French Phenomenology, by Tarek R. Dika, W. Chris Hackett. French Studies: A Quarterly Review, vol. 71 no. 3, 2017, p. 450-451. Project MUSE muse.jhu.edu/article/666301.

Notre Dame Philosophy Reviews, https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/quiet-powers-of-the-possible-interviews-in-contemporary-french-phenomenology/

Quiet Powers book is an important achievement and was published in the most prestigious book series (Perspectives in Continental Philosophy) in English dealing with Continental Philosophy.

Hackett's edition of Wahl’s Human Existence and Transcendence was reviewed here:

https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/human-existence-and-transcendence/

and here (Continental Philosophy Review, the premier journal in its field):

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11007-020-09488-8

These reviews show it is a notable acheivement by returning Wahl back to prominence in contemporary Continental Philosophy in English as well as recovering an historical witness to philosophical engagement in France during the Occupation and the Holocaust. The book, in French, is commonly called a "watershed" and its English translation is a big deal.

Hackett's writings and translations are published in major academic publishers that form the upper echelon of his academic field(s) (Fordham UP, Northwestern UP, Bloomsbury Academic, University of Virginia Press, University of Notre Dame Press, most notably) and his translations and monographs have been reviewed in the most significant outlets in modern theology (incl. Modern Theology itself) and continental philosophy (Cont. Phil Review, Notre Dame Phil Reviews, etc). A look at his CV on Academia.edu shows that he has published dozens of articles in most of these outlets as well, and has publications, beyond English-lang journals, are found in Hungarian, French, and Spanish outlets.

Dr. Hackett's Outside the Gates was reviewed here: https://europeanconservative.com/articles/reviews/a-philosophical-adventure-towards-freedom/

Based on this, Hackett should be called a central figure in French Phenomenology, Continental Philosophy, and has made significant contributions to Catholic Theology from out of this nexus.

As a key figure in the reception of French Phenomenology into English via translation and publication, as an author developing a constructive philosophical vision based on this reception, I would say he's a notable figure in his academic fields.

The problem with this article is that it frames Hackett as a novelist instead of a philosopher. 216.249.67.21 (talk) 15:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Continental Philosophy review is the same one that I found, but I agree that the other sources put him over the threshold, and now that Wglegoman has address the WP:PROMO issues I'm happy to switch to keep. Jfire (talk) 03:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Philosophy, Christianity, England, Australia, Indiana, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The current page does not contain sufficient external evidence of notability to retain. I haven't done a full search online/offline to see if there is something else to bring it up to line, but since it very clearly smells like an autobiography, if it's not improved before the end of discussion, it looks like a delete. @Jrife's analysis is sound. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See improved article. Wglegoman (talk) 19:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changing to Keep -- rewritten article (thanks Wglegoman) makes the WP:PROF C1 criteria pass pretty darn clear. In a book-based field that many books/translations placed with major university presses (and their difficult peer review processes) strongly suggests considerable academic respect by peers. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 00:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep ~~Delete- a search of google scholar doesn't turn up anything that would imply he meets WP:PROF~~ Psychastes (talk) 04:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He publishes under several variations: W. C. Hackett, William C. Hackett, William Christian Hackett, W. Chris Hackett. I think that is it. His scholarly profile opens up more with that in mind. Wglegoman (talk) 19:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, nice catch there, yeah. I see the sources you've added, he should meet WP:PROF based on those reviews of his book. Psychastes (talk) 20:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - WP:HEY - with thanks to Wglegoman. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 06:32, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in view of the multiple scholarly sources identified in this discussion and added to the articleso that WP:NACADEMIC is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:02, 21 April 2024 (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.