Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Harding (professor)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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. I could have called this N/C and probably been within admin discretion, but what put me closer to keep is that we have reasonable belief that the Weldon chair is tied with the Dean position. This is not THEREMUSTBESOURCES as StarryGrandma has provided reasonable evidence of that being true in the very recent past, and non one has been able to ID a change rendering it no longer true. If sources don't eventuate, this can be revisited down the line. Star Mississippi 01:26, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Harding (professor)

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Sarah Harding (professor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This person fails the notability guidelines for biographies, namely:

  • They do not demonstrate a lasting contribution to their field as per WP:ANYBIO

This alone qualifies the article for notability deletion, but in several other guidelines, such as WP:SIGCOV and having and independent source it just barely squeaks by. Clearly and article that should be deleted. AriTheHorse 04:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see that, though you've just agreed the article qualifies under WP:Notability (academics), so I would argue that other policies don't need to apply. We'll see what other say. Cheers! Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 04:13, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly Disagree: The "General" in "general notability guideline" indicates that it applies to every article. AriTheHorse 04:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are right that it can apply to any subject matter; but it doesn't say that it supersedes all other notability policies. Again, happy to hear what others have the say :) Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 04:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it doesn't. XOR'easter (talk) 23:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I was not able to verify the named professorship to my satisfaction: it is on the subject's linkedin, and on the Interlochen biography (likely provided by the subject with minimal oversight), but nowhere on Dalhousie's webpages. The citation record doesn't look like a slam dunk for WP:NPROF C1. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 08:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Clearly meets WP:NACADEMIC #5. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But if it doesnt meet any other notability criteria, such as that it cannot be independently verified that she actually meets WP:NACADEMIC, is she really notable? AriTheHorse 12:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to see it, is it still a tree? Yes. We do not require our topics to meet all other notability guidelines. We do not require articles on sportspeople to meet WP:NPOL. We do not require articles on musicians to meet WP:NATHLETE. And similarly, we do not require articles on professors to meet notability standards for other topics. WP:NPROF explicitly states that non-independent but reliable sources (such as official publications or web sites of the employer) may be used to verify that the person passes criterion #5. As someone who passes a Wikipedia notability criterion, they are automatically ipso facto notable. The fact that they do not pass a different criterion based on publicity rather than professional recognition is unimportant, just as the fact that most celebrities are not given named professorships is unimportant. Keep, bordering on WP:SK3 speedy keep, no valid nomination rationale given. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:27, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @David Eppstein I believe the point that @AriTheHorse is making, or trying to make, is that there is no reliable source presented for the named professorship whether independent or primary. I.e. the only citation for the named professorship is not an "official publication or web site of the employer" but rather what looks like a user generated bio for Harding's role as a trustee for an unrelated charity [1]. I have tried the employer Dalhousies website under several searches - and same as Russ Woodroofe above I am unable to verify the named professorship. Also agreed - citation record does not look great from what I can find. Delete [though please ping me if a WP:RS is presented and happy to change]. ResonantDistortion 19:55, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, exactly. Thank you. AriTheHorse 00:35, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Harding is the new dean of the law school at Dalhousie and their public relations department has yet to catch up and create press releases with her full title or a faculty web page. Refreshing that their PR group is not as agressive as those of US universities, but it will have a university link soon enough. The full appointment is both as Dean and Weldon Professor. See these items for the previous deans for evidence:
  • Kim Brooks, Dean and Weldon Professor of Law, Schulich School of Law at Dalhousie. - 2013 press release
  • Camille Cameron, Dean, Weldon Professor of Law at the Schulich School of Law - 2017 anouncement
  • Phillip Saunders, Dean of Law and Weldon Professor of Law, 2005-2010 - in pdf here
StarryGrandma (talk) 21:59, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
StarryGrandma, so the Weldon Professorship is tied to the Dean position? I don't think this is the kind of named professorship intended by WP:NPROF C5! Russ Woodroofe (talk) 22:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It sounds like there is an absence of reliable sources establishing academic notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just because the named professorship is tied to the top leadership position, does not make it NOT a named professorship. I mean, you get hired as both, instead of hired as just a named professor, what is your point here? Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 07:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would assume, also, that when the named professorship is added to her university biography (by all the accounts above) she will suddenly become notable ... but isn't yet ... seems a bit intransigent as no one has said that a Weldon Professor is not notable except for one person who believes a Dean can't be a professor too for some reason. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 08:02, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. WP:NPROF C5 is the subcriterion that requires the most attention, as named chairs have proliferated. I agree that the Weldon chair appears to be tied to the dean position, and I do not think that a chair granted for holding an administrative office is the kind of distinguished professorship discussed in the subcriterion, especially when the administrative office is not otherwise a pass of NPROF. However, when I looked more carefully at the citation record, I am seeing several highly cited papers, in what I understand to be a low to mid citation field: Justifying Repatriation of Native American Cultural Property, Value, Obligation and Cultural Heritage, and Comparative Reasoning and Judicial Review. The name is common enough that searching is a little difficult: "Sarah Harding chicago" was useful. I think it is enough for WP:NPROF C1, which is what WP:NPROF C5 is supposed to be a shortcut for anyway. "Weak" because the the citation rates drop off quickly after that. I agree that the nomination was ill-formed, not considering the most relevant notability standard. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:05, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. I agree that the professorship is probably tied to being dean, but agree that this is a named professorship nonetheless. While I don't think that all deans are necessarily notable, I do think being a dean is an indication of notability, and I think being dean of Schulich School of Law is a particularly good indication of notability. Josh Milburn (talk) 10:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify until a WP:RS does indeed confirm the named professorship (!vote changed from delete). Because: the evidence provided by StarryGrandma does indicate it is likely the Weldon professorship is linked to being Dean, but none of those references explicitly state the two posts are indeed linked. Consequently, as this is a new appointment, it should not be long until it is confirmed and the article may then leave draft. ResonantDistortion 19:13, 28 November 2023 (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/Sarah_Harding_(professor)&oldid=1189397065"