Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Read (historian)

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Charles Read (historian)}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Charles Read (historian)}})

This came originally from a discussion on the talk page of WP:AfD: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion#Charles_Read_(historian) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nhinchey (talk • contribs) 15:30, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Dr. Charles Read is not notable generally nor as an academic. If at some point he becomes notable, most of what's in this article won't be relevant, because it's pretty much all small potatoes awards, and one interview in a newspaper.

He clearly doesn't meet [WP:GNG]; googling him shows his employee bio and his LinkedIn page and little else. He also does not meet any of the criteria of WP:Notability (academics). Going through all the academics criteria here:

1. No one claims he significantly impacted his field
2. No notable awards: the awards listed are (1) an award for dissertations, (2) an award for new researchers, (3) the T. S. Ashton Prize, worth only £1,500 and none of whose winners (except this one) have Wikipedia pages, and (4) an unnamed "prestigious prize at MIT" - but MIT doesn't seem to have his name on any of their webpages.
3. Not an elected member of any "highly selective and prestigious" societies. His highest listed academic positions are pretty common -- he's one of 60-odd current fellows at Corpus Christi College
4. There's no evidence I can find that his work has had a significant impact on higher education
5. He's not been a chair or distinguished professor
6. He's not had any highest-level positions anywhere
7. The extent of his impact outside academia is being mentioned in a news article about Liz because he sent an unsolicited paper that the government ignored
8. He's not led any major academic journal

Delete Weak Delete because he doesn't meet any WP:N (see below for change reason). nhinchey (talk) 15:17, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete as per nomination. Pragmatic Puffin (talk) 10:25, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 18:14, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Economics, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:47, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as per nomination. GrexHarmony (talk) 11:37, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep Charles Read has contributed significantly to the history of the Irish Famine in relating its cause to financial crises and to the causes of financial crises.Middleton A. The Great Famine in Ireland and Britain’s financial crisis. By Charles Read. Pp 341. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press. 2022. £25 paperback. Irish Historical Studies. 2024;48(173):194-195. doi:10.1017/ihs.2024.9Malcolm, Elizabeth. “The Great Famine in Ireland and Britain's Financial Crisis by Charles Read, and: Dublin and the Great Irish Famine Ed. by Emily Mark-Fitzgerald, Ciarán McCabe, and Ciarán Reilly (Review).” Victorian studies 66.1 (2023): 138–140.Richard A. Gaunt Charles Read, The Great Famine in Ireland and Britain’s Financial Crisis, Journal of Modern History 96 (2024), 4 pp. 961-962 His involvement in pointing out (just before) the circumstances of Liz Truss government causing crises is also significant. In the UK we are suffering financially from this still. Perhaps the importance of the article can also perhaps be judged by the aggression of the attack on it by Et in Arcadia 1, a reference to 'Death in Paradise' and presumably a death threat. I have taken the precaution of reporting this to UK Police. Silsoe (talk) 14:47, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

• Weak keep. I've been editing this article to remove the considerable amounts of promotional fluff. In the process, I did see that he is an elected Fellow of the Royal Historical Society (confirmed on their website, see [https://royalhistsoc.org/membership/rhs-fellows-and-members/ here]) - not an associate Fellow or a member, but an elected Fellow - and that, by itself, is probably enough to satisfy C3 of WP:NPROF. If anyone has information to the contrary, please advise. Qflib (talk) 17:40, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
• Weak keep. I found and added four published reviews of his first book. I didn't find any reviews of the second book, only one reviewed book is below my threshold for WP:AUTHOR, and the criteria for FRHS [https://royalhistsoc.org/membership/fellows/] look below what I would consider as selective enough for WP:PROF#C3, but I think the non-review coverage lifts this up to a borderline keep. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:09, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

::David Eppstein is probably right, both about C3 and about AUTHOR. Qflib (talk) 00:41, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

• Changing my !vote to a weak delete: The article has improved considerably, and I hadn't thought to consider WP: AUTHOR. My nomination is written with a quite confident voice, but I'm a novice with respect to AfDs, and nothing in this article is an area of expertise for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nhinchey (talk • contribs)
• Keep. First book has some academic reviews (second book has had at least some coverage), he's had some press attention due to the Truss link, and the Ashton Prize is not insignificant. Crosses the line, in my view. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.