Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A. D. Lublinskaya
=[[A. D. Lublinskaya]]=
The result was Keep. Nomination withdrawn and no votes to delete (Non-admin closure) -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 03:13, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
:{{la|A. D. Lublinskaya}} – (
:({{Find sources|A. D. Lublinskaya}})
Academic. I am all for inclusion of most historians, but publication of a single book ([https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Alexandra+D.+Lublinskaya%22&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1#q=inauthor:%22A.+D.+Lublinskaya%22&safe=off&tbm=bks]), and no significant coverage otherwise doesn't seem to cut it, I am afraid. In other words, fails WP:PROF requirement for academic notability. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 05:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 05:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Comment. There are some respectable cites on GS. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC).
- Keep. Fully complies with the first criterion in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:PROF Wikipedia:Notability (academics)]: "1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources." As the editor who created the article, I didn't add any more of the several references from reliable sources that are available out there because the three existing ones cover the requirements... and having more references than actual sentences does seem a bit like overkill. Literature, both scientific and fictional, is full of "one-book wonders", so am surprised that "publication of a single book" is cited as a reason for AfD. While not in the league of fiction bestsellers, Cambridge University Press has considered Lublinskaya's work sufficiently relevant to bother translating it. --Technopat (talk) 06:39, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:PROF. Found a number of sources including a full obit (she died in 1980). If it helps, the book "French Absolutism" is used in two university courses,[https://www.ucl.ac.uk/history/postgraduatestudy/taughtmasters/histg101][http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~gwb/GWEBOOKLET.htm] and a University of Oxford biography list.[http://ecohist.history.ox.ac.uk/04Advanced%20papers/Schedule_I/AP_biblios/social_cultural_change_france_bib.htm] -- Green Cardamom (talk) 18:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:AUTHOR, which asks for multiple independent reviews of the author's work. Here are four: The English Historical Review at [http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/563060?uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21102623208581]; The New York Review of Books at [http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1970/jan/01/looking-for-the-ancien-regime/?pagination=false]; French Studies at [http://fs.oxfordjournals.org/content/XXIV/2/174.extract]; and Economic History Review at [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0289.1969.tb00179.x/abstract]. Novickas (talk) 20:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks to all who helped rescue this, I withdraw this nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:39, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
: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.