Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Dever

: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 delete. MBisanz talk 01:48, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

=[[Richard Dever]]=

:{{la|Richard Dever}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Richard_Dever Stats])

:({{Find sources|Richard Dever}})

Does not appear to meet WP:NOTABILITY guidelines. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:44, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete this non-notable professor who fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:BK. Qworty (talk) 06:12, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep It helps to look at the books. Teaching persons with mental retardation : a model for curriculum development and teaching published by a standard educational publisher, is in 243 libraries, and was translated into French. Translations indicate, though not prove notability as an author. I'll add the book reviews later today, which prove it. . He was pre-internet, os it takes careful checking. (I note he was a professor at Indiana, a first-rate research university--true, it was in special education, and some people might think that field insufficiently rigorous for even the most distinguished universities to matter, but I think that's prejudice, which has sometimes prevented our recognition of notability under WP:PROF. will also show notability as WP:PROF) I note the nom. had tagged this as a speedy, despite the listing of the publications--surely publishing a book from a regular publisher is some indication of significance. DGG ( talk ) 15:21, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

:* Comment Two books are {{ISBN|9780697205599}}, {{ISBN|9780940898196}} and both fail :WP:NBOOK. Claim that he predates the Internet is false as the first book listed above is 1997 and the Internet was mainstream at this point, particularly in academic circles. Even if his books were notable, that doesn't make him notable. He himself does not appear to pass WP:ACADEMIC. This is borne-out in the lack of mentions by other scholars. Feel free to read the criteria. As for nomination for speedy, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Dever&diff=519319193&oldid=519319082 there were no verifiable publications at the time and a trivial mention] and one newspaper article doesn't count. A google search returned nothing for the subject. A search on the book title, did return {{ISBN|978-0675084376}} which still doesn't pass any threshold for notability. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:20, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:35, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:35, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

::Did you by any chance try the professional indexes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 14:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Comment - This shouldn't be deleted until someone else with expertise on the notability of academics weighs in. In general, I'm inclined to want to keep material on retired full professors, as a general principle, but of course this is a personal opinion rather than a policy-based argument. Carrite (talk) 17:18, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep As his first publication at gscholar is 1965, he is basically a pre-intertubes guy. From articles like [http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=_tohAAAAIBAJ&sjid=bKAFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5243,670382&dq=richard-dever+professor&hl=en this] it seems he was a pioneer in educating for "not a very glamorous area of teaching" - and thus writing early articles in a field without high citation rates. With the textbooks, important enough to be translated, adds up to a keep.John Z (talk) 09:57, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 03:00, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Weak delete. [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22community+living%22+%22mentally+retarded%22 This search] fails to convince me that he stands out as an expert on community living for the retarded, even in his pre-internet times — other publications from the same time period or a little earlier have significantly higher citations. And even if he passes WP:PROF, we can't write an article without sources that say nontrivial things about the subject or his works, and I haven't been able to find any. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:00, 17 November 2012 (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.