Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deborah Hertz

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 keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:16, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deborah_Hertz

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

i am perplexed as to why she is considered notable. i have checked throughout googleland but found nothing RS. yes, she is a professor with a named chair. but that is really it. when i recommended it for speedy deletion, there were no references at all. an editor added two: a) a link to the jewish woman's online encyclopedia - read their "about" page to see that any jewish woman can be listed; and b) a link to a book review of one of her books - yes, she was published by yale u press, but, many many people have been published there as well. so,unless i am really missing something, i would like to recommend that this article be deleted for not being notable. Soosim (talk) 18:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep As it says in the article and is easily confirmed by Google News, Books, and Scholar searches, this person is the author of academic books and articles in both English and German and is cited as an authority by other academic writers and publications and locally by San Diego news media. But even besides that, per Wikipedia:Notability (academics) simply holding a named chair position is enough; this nomination itself contains the information that satisfies notability. --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 18:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Hertz holds a chair at a major university, so she has notability per WP:SCHOLAR. City Of Silver 18:51, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:43, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on basis of cites in GS. Has the nominator looked at these? Xxanthippe (talk) 00:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Keep definitely meets WP:AUTHOR, #3. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 07:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment like i said, i am just perplexed. i certainly looked in GS, but again, seems like lots of citations without any real RS. and, as i said, the named chair does exist. okie dokie... Soosim (talk) 09:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A citation in GS, and more so in WoS and Scopus, is by definition a reliable and independent source. See WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Speedy Keep an authority with an endowed chair at a major university. Wikipedia should defer to UCSD's assessment of her notability. Remember that most humanities fields are NOT represented on Google Scholar. JSTOR or an article indexing service are better indicators, and she's all over JSTOR with reviews of her books in many major journals such as Monatshefte and German Studies Review and The American Historical Review in addition to many articles of her own. A textbook case of how the AfD-Prof process is more designed for scientists than historians and other humanists. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 20:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.