Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serge Guinchard

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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Serge Guinchard

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

Delete. I prodded this and quite rightly another good faith editor removed the Prod saying it should be improved rather than deleted (to paraphrase that editor). In my opinion since all the sources are WP:PRIMARY, WP:OR, and the person is not WP:N (although may meet WP:PROF, it is hard to tell through all the vermicelli), the article is a WP:RESUME and basically unintelligible to an audience who cannot back translate it into French; for which the article at FR:WP will suffice. It is a tar pit. It contravenes WP:MOS in so many ways that it were better deleted and recreated as a decent stub. It is also WP:COPYVIO for not having a tag on the discussion page saying it is a translation (bit by bit) from French Wikipedia. Si Trew (talk) 22:48, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You say that "all the sources are WP:PRIMARY". Could you explain why that's true of the Gindre book?

The article does appear to be a translation of the article on the French Wikipedia. I've gone ahead and added {{Translated page}} to provide attribution. —rybec 20:55, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He has been appointed Commandeur of the Ordre des Palmes Académiques, which I would say satisfies criterion #1 of WP:ANYBIO. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- To clarify, this is the highest grade of this order. Since we consider that Commanders of the Order of the British Empire do satisfy WP:ANYBIO I think it might be considered a little discriminatory not to consider that an equivalent rank in a French order (which, unlike the Order of the British Empire, doesn't have any higher grades) also satisfies the criterion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:26, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. Has made little impact as a jurist as judged from GS cites. If not delete then stubbify as article is verbose and promotional. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:15, 21 February 2014 (UTC).[reply]

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) 01:46, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Horrendous overly detailed article. Most honors listed are nothing special and not even worth mentioning. However, if good sources can be found for the decorations (Knight of the Legion of Honor, Officer of the National Order of Merit, and Commander of the Ordre des Palmes académiques), then this would obviously meet WP:ANYBIO. --Randykitty (talk) 18:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The first two honours are probably too low to qualify alone, but the third is almost certainly high enough, and the combination of the three definitely makes him notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 18:15, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - The book with the list of 2003/2004 Commanders is 160 euros.[1] There is a list at frWiki, which claims to use that printed source, and has the BLP.[2] Do we trust the frWiki editor, or should we maybe use WP:RX to verify the listing? Here is the website of the award,[3] which is in French. HTH. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 01:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Xxanthippe mentioned google-scholar being "too low" to justify impact as a jurist. Methinks this metric has to be judged (nudge nudge wink wink) based on the field of inquiry. This guy had a reasonably complete career writing legal papers, from his PhD in the 1970s through 2009 that I noticed. But his main work is reference-books, with thousands of pages and a dozen editions. He started doing that in the 1974/1981 era, with his Termes Juridiques and then Procédure civile.

Specialist-reference, Procédure civile (Civil Procedure), 63 cites (102 total across all editions) from 1981-2010, in French/Chinese, 30 editions.

Specialist-reference, Droit processuel (Procedure Law), 19 cites (42 total across all editions) from 2001-2013, French, 1400 pages, 7 editions.

Specialist-reference, Procédure pénale (Criminal Procedure), 31 cites (31 total across all editions) from ~2005(2010)-2013, French, 9 editions.

Specialist-dictionary, Termes Juridiques (Legal Terms), 15 cites (21 total across all editions) from ~1974(2001)-2013, in French/Japanese/Spanish/Portuguese, 21 editions.

Specialist-text, Institutions judiciaires (Judicial institutions), 3 cites (7 total across all editions) from ~1995(2003)-2009, in French/Chinese, 10 editions.

Papers in the 2000s, L'ambition raisonnée d'une justice apaisée, 7 cites (33 across all papers).

Papers in the 1990s, Droit et pratique des voies d'exécution, 5 cites (34 across all papers).

Papers in the 1980s, Droit patrimonial de la famille au Sénégal, 8 cites (8 across all papers).

Papers in the 1970s, L'affectation des biens en droit privé français, 8 cites (22 across all papers).

Outside of the raw cite-counts above (102/42/31/21/7 plus 33/34/8/22), he was on university law-faculties for 39 years, 1969-2007 at Lyon2/Lyon3/DakarU/PantheonAssas. He was dean of the faculty for 6 years at Lyon3, and was an administrator at a few places outside the universities. As others have noticed, he won some reasonably hefty awards. All this, in combination, seems pretty wikiNotable. Hope this helps, and thanks for improving wikipedia, folks. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 01:02, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

which categories of WP:Prof and WP:GNG does this affect? Xxanthippe (talk) 02:10, 23 February 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Keep appears to meet WP:PROF, WP:ANYBIO - WP:AFD n'est pas le cleanup. Barney the barney barney (talk) 11:17, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- in addition to the Commander of the Ordre des Palmes académiques, there's a Festschrift in his honor -- that's generally enough to put a case over the top. CS cites woe someone who worked in the 70s or 80s in a field and language where GS does not index well are not really relevant. 30 editions of a book IS what is relevant. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 15:53, 23 February 2014 (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.