Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Heartfield: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 12:30, 12 August 2021

James Heartfield

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of the page does not meet the notability criteria for academics as described in these guidelines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)

The subject was an unsuccessful candidate for an election. The subject of the page does not meet the notability criteria for politicians as described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Politicians_and_judges — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maud.Clowd (talk • contribs) 09:12, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

He may, however, meet the requirements of an author. He's published quite a lot of books, which sit somewhere in between academic and popular, making it hard to know exactly what standards to use. However, I note that his book "The British and Foreign Anti Slavery Society" has been subject to a number of independent reviews [1][2] Elemimele (talk) 09:25, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Elemimele: I hadn't considered that his notability might come from him being an author. However, the reviews you reference are published in academic journals. I think academic books in history will usually have independent book reviews. So I'm not sure this makes the author notable. Perhaps a historian could confirm or deny this. Maud.Clowd (talk) 12:42, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't the foggiest idea! I know we're encouraged to use common sense about academic books that may have smaller print-runs and appeal to a narrower range of people (i.e. a truly academic book that got reviewed twice in academic journals would have been one that made an exceptional impact; most fade into literature without mention!), but my impression is that these are supposed to appeal more widely, in which case you're completely right. I have no strong feelings either way. Elemimele (talk) 12:49, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heartfield01 (talk) 20:26, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heartfield01 (talk) 12:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC)I tend to agree that there is not much of a case for a page on wikipedia about James Heartfield Brilliant as my works are, I do not believe that I do qualify as a notable academic. I concur with the proposal to delete.[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 09:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 09:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 09:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 09:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 09:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 :: I haven't the foggiest idea! I know we're encouraged to use common sense about academic books that may have smaller print-runs and appeal to a narrower range of people (i.e. a truly academic book that got reviewed twice in academic journals would have been one that made an exceptional impact; most fade into literature without mention!), but my impression is that these are supposed to appeal more widely, in which case you're completely right. I have no strong feelings either way. [[User:Elemimele|Elemimele]] ([[User talk:Elemimele|talk]]) 12:49, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
-[[User:Heartfield01|Heartfield01]] ([[User talk:Heartfield01|talk]]) 20:26, 11 August 2021 (UTC) I tend to agree that losing an election is not notable.
+[[User:Heartfield01|Heartfield01]] ([[User talk:Heartfield01|talk]]) 20:26, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
-But I think that my research and written work has made a valuable contribution in a number of areas.
-Both books ''The Aborigines' Protection Society'' and the ''British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society'' are the acknowledged leaders on their particular subjects. According to Google Scholar, my book on the ''Aborigines' Protection Society'' has been cited in 99 collected books and articles. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=5704919096256914697&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en
+[[User:Heartfield01|Heartfield01]] ([[User talk:Heartfield01|talk]]) 12:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC)I tend to agree that there is not much of a case for a page on wikipedia about James Heartfield
-For the Royal Geographical Society Jonathan Wright named The Aborigines' Protection Society 'book of the month' when it was published in November 2011, saying it was 'a major, well-written and closely researched contribution to the study of 19th century imperialism' (''Geographical,'' November 2011, p 65) It was, according the the journal ''Settler Colonial Studies'' 'A welcome and long overdue history of one of the most influential lobby groups in Britain and its emerging empire during the nineteenth century.'
+Brilliant as my works are, I do not believe that I do qualify as a notable academic. I concur with the proposal to delete.
-Senior Lecturer in colonial and indigenous histories of Australia and the Pacific at La Trobe University Tracey Banivanua Mar, while critical, accepted that the Aborigines' Protection Society was 'formidably researched, and for any student of British imperialism the book will be instructive and fascinating'. (Arena) I think that the reason that the APS book (and this is also true of the BFASS book) was successful was that it was based on close research of the thousands of pages that the Society published on different parts of the world where Britain was active. The material covered simply had not been looked at in the detail before.
-I'll add more about the other works later.
 :<small class="delsort-notice">Note:  This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators|list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Curbon7|Curbon7]] ([[User talk:Curbon7|talk]]) 09:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)</small>