Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Allitt
=[[Patrick Allitt]]=
:{{la|Patrick Allitt}} – (
:({{Find sources|Patrick Allitt}})
Delete University professors who are published authors are not inherently notable. They still require recognition by substantive coverage in reliable third-party publications. Professor Allitt is at a major university, Emory. He does hold the chair in History endowed by the Cahoon Family. The chair was created in September 2009. ([http://college.emory.edu/home/assets/documents/minutes/2009/faculty_sep16.pdf "Minutes - College Faculty Meeting, September 16, 2009"]) Under the guidelines at Notability (academics) Criteria 5, this chair would make him notable. However, the guidelines are just that, guidelines, and Professor Allitt fails the very basic concept expressed in the Notability guidelines that notability requires "notice" to a significant degree by independent sources. This Wikipedia article has only inside sources like Emory, and a link to an article Prof. Allitt wrote for the Nationa Review. Googling Professor Allitt produces a fair number of hits, but those hits are to press relaeses for his lecture appearences, Amazon.com comments on his books, book and publisher catalog blurbs, torrent download options, references at emory.edu, and an occasional book review. The book reviews I've read so-far don't discuss the professor. The Wikipedia links that point to this article do so as an author, and not for notability. Now if it were true that there were significant or even reasonable coverage of the man in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, with articles, for example, that discussed his role as Director of the Center for Teaching and Curriculum at Emory University, or if he were the recipient of a significant prize in History, such as one of the twenty awarded annually by the American Historical Association, I wouldn't have a problem. But criteria 5, in and by itself without any other support, I find insufficient to meet the need that "notability is not temporary". I would rather discuss criteria 5 in the specific case first, rather than in general (1) to test the waters and (2) to give meat to the arguments. --Bejnar (talk) 17:37, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Besides meeting WP:ACADEMIC #5, he was profiled in the Atlanta Journal Constitution back in 1990 ([http://docs.newsbank.com/g/GooglePM/AT/lib00286,0EB7C4625C1E26CB.html here]); also see [http://old.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/rosen200410130842.asp here] and [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123240222&ps=cprs here]. Several of his six academic books have been reviewed multiple times in RSs (WP:AUTHOR). He is so widely quoted in national newspapers and in hits on Google scholar (also search with his middle initial, "N"), I also think he probably meets WP:ACADEMIC #1 in addition to WP:GNG. This doesn't seem like a close case to me, certainly if the goal is to test WP:ACADEMIC #5. I would take this to that guideline's talk page. Novaseminary (talk) 18:04, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
:*Comment Even as I typed my keep !vote above, other eds have already added other good RSs. Novaseminary (talk) 18:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Allitt's ideas are widely discussed and debated in the scholarly literature, for example he is the subject of articles by Jay P. Dolan, "A view from the right: Catholic conservatives," Reviews in American History, March 95, Vol. 23 Issue 1, pp 165-69; Albert Gelpi, "The Catholic Presence in American Culture," American Literary History, Spring 1999, Vol. 11 Issue 1, pp 196-212; and Barry D. Riccio, "Patrick Allitt's 'Catholic Intellectuals and Conservative Politics in America: 1950-1985," Cithara May 1995, Vol. 34 Issue 2, pp 37-41. In addition the reviews of his books emphasize his broad learning and understanding of American culture. For example, in the leading journal Church History (June 2005) we learn that "Allitt deftly sketches the complex philosophical and theological issues surrounding the "death of God" controversies in the 1960s, and then provides numerous examples of how this issue had cultural and social impact. In another fascinating section on church architecture, Allitt provides numerous anecdotes to suggest how religious congregations, leaders, and architects envisioned new relationships between theologies and sacred space. Allitt seems most at home with this material, and the true value of the book lies in these nimble and thought-provoking discussions.' [by Prof Courtney Bender, Columbia U.]; Professor Moore of Cornell University writing in Catholic Historical Review, July 2004, says "Any writer who has attempted to track a subject through a long stretch of time appreciates how difficult it is to balance the requirement of inclusiveness with a consistent elaboration of central themes. Patrick Allitt in his confident survey of American religion since World War II succeeds in this task far better than most and has produced a volume of immense value to university students, general readers, and scholars needing a reliable reference source." This is strong praise for a scholar from leading RS and certainly validates that he is a notable historian. --and obviously it meets the criteria of "substantive coverage in reliable third-party publications". Rjensen (talk) 18:08, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Bleh, I think that's enough reference adding for now. Scholarly reference searching is rather boring, I must say. :/ Anyways, what they said. The references clearly show that he is notable. I don't know how to calculate H-index's myself, but i'm sure his number would be quite significant for his field of study. SilverserenC 18:30, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Notable for his history of American conservatism. I believe there are far too many articles about non-notable persons, but he meets the criteria. TFD (talk) 18:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- Withdraw I withdraw the nomination, even if a great deal (all?) of the cited material is book reviews, and not about the man. Can anyone suggest a person who is kept just for his/her chair holding? --Bejnar (talk) 19:38, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- about the man --you mean his birthplace and education and family??? The cites are about his ideas, his research skills, his ability to interpret history, his influence on scholars. That's where notability emerges for Wikipedia. Rjensen (talk) 21:35, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 18 October 2010 (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.