Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard J H Matthews

: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. If someone wants a userfy, just ask at my talk page later. -- Cirt (talk) 17:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

=[[Richard J H Matthews]]=

:{{la|Richard J H Matthews}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard J H Matthews}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{Find sources|Richard J H Matthews}})

NN person, with few [http://www.google.com/#num=100&hl=en&q=%22Richard+J+H+Matthews%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=c401d881a5ff002f Google hits] CTJF83 chat 07:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. -gadfium 09:07, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • The subject is a classical scholar in a rather arcane area which google does not cover well and he published before google became important. Anyway, why should google be the arbiter of what is or is not notable or important? It is just one of the factors to be considered. The subject is certainly important in three particular areas: classical studies in New Zealand, New Zealand literature influenced by the classics and the study of Hellenic poetry. I think this article should be 'Retained for further development.Rick570 (talk) 10:23, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Well Google is the easiest way to find out if someone has WP:Significant coverage, if you can show that by other mediums, please link us. CTJF83 chat 16:19, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete - seems to be a little bit below the criteria - SimonLyall (talk) 10:26, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete - does not seem particularly, or even sufficiently, notable. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 10:51, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:59, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete. Does not meet WP:ACADEMIC guidelines. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 20:11, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep. This person is not an academic, i.e holding an academic position in a university or similar. He is an independent classical scholar who has published on various matters in his field. He has a status in his field of endeavour. I am surprised that you are making such a big deal about this person when the hurdle in other areas are so low, like sport or popular music, for example. Why such an issue about this person, who is certainly notable in his field, just as certain otherwise obscure sports persons may be in theirs. To confine consideration to the internet is too narrow. It excludes so many people. I am researching other material, but it will take longer than a week to access it.Rick570 (talk) 23:38, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • I suggest we userfy this article until such time as more references can be found, per the above comment.-gadfium 23:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment. Is this the same person as R J H Matthews-Břeský, who wrote a number of papers on English pedagogy in the 1970s? Google scholar doesn't show a lot of citations for them but I'm not persuaded one way or another by that as it doesn't seem to be the sort of subject that GS is good at finding citations on. Anyway, if it is the same person, this would give a broader basis for expanding the article and/or finding reliable sources to prove notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment. The name is a puzzle but Matthews was a teacher of English in Switzerland and he did his Ph.D at Univ of Berne (German medium probably). It all fits together. I will do some more research when I get time. Thank you David for your help.Rick570 (talk) 09:42, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep - In addition to the other benefits of retaining the article it should be noted that we list one of his works as perhaps our only proper ref. (under further reading) in our article: M%C4%81ori_influence_on_New_Zealand_English. The refs is R. J. H. Matthews (1984). Maori Influence on New Zealand English. World Englishes 3 (3), 156–159. doi:10.1111/j.1467-971X.1984.tb00597.x (Msrasnw (talk) 15:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC))
  • Comment:The problem is that the article's references are mostly to Matthews' own works. What it needs is references to other publications which say that Matthews or his works are important.-gadfium 22:37, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete Notability is demonstrated neither in the article or in the few references that have been uncovered since this was nominated. Doesn't meet WP:PROF or WP:BIO.--RadioFan (talk) 11:34, 8 July 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.