Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Shantz (author)

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. So Why 20:08, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Shantz (author)

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

Article topic (Canadian sociologist, criminology) lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) Books aren't widely held/cited, so doesn't pass scholar notability guideline. Secondarily, the current draft reads like a CV and was written by a single-purpose account (if a COI, undisclosed). There are no suitable redirect targets. If someone finds more (non-English and offline) reliable sources, please {{ping}} me. czar 22:00, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. czar 22:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. czar 22:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. czar 22:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. czar 22:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. czar 22:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Prolific writer, but work has garnered almost no attention. Fails WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:47, 21 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. Do Not Delete.. This author has substantial worldcat holdings, 8,242 holdings, far more than many others in the field with entries. Also google scholar shows significant citations over multiple publications. In addition are contributions to movement publications and community use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.245.253.123 (talk) 00:35, 23 June 2017 (UTC) — 162.245.253.123 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:53, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GS h-index of 8 not there yet. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:57, 23 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]

GS h-index is actually 11. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.245.253.123 (talk) 01:54, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not on my counting, but even if it were, it would not be enough. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:29, 23 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks to the new link to GS I now make it 10. Still not enough WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:13, 28 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Keep. Do not delete. That this entry is being discussed as solely academic is improper. The person has made substantial contributions to several social movements, including environmental politics, rank and file labor movements, and anarchism, and is noted on that basis. He coined the term green syndicalism which has been debated in environmental and other movements. This alone would recommend the entry. Other issues widely discussed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.5.123.188 (talk) 20:17, 25 June 2017 (UTC) — 154.5.123.188 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

is noted on that basis

Then it should be easy to provide reliable, secondary sources that confirm your claim. Also these two comments are from Vancouver IPs—if you have an affiliation with Shantz, you need to declare it czar 03:34, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Agree that subject is prolific, but a quick sampling of WorldCat shows his print books, e.g. Cyber Disobedience, Living Anarchy, Radical Ecology, etc. to have only double-digit holdings, at best. Article claims he is the editor of a journal called Radical Criminology, but no journal matching that name is indexed in any of the main databases, and it seems to have published only 6 issues in its entire history. Sources are completely inadequate. Article is basically a CV and has lots of OR, raising COI questions. He is at one of Canada's "polys", basically a combination of an undergrad institution and a vocational school..not that this matters, but it's not a bastion of deep graduate thought in social issues, which is the article's claim for notability. This appears to be a case of a person working very hard as a professor, but whose many works have not been noted by the academic world. Agricola44 (talk) 17:16, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a search in JSTOR turned up a single, co-authored article and 2 book reviews, fewer than most scholars have before they finish the PhD. Checked his 2015 book Specters of Anarchy: Literature and the Anarchist Imagination, published by house I have never heard of, http://www.algora.com Website seems to indicate that this is self-publishing, at least, the author sets up a Word file and arranges his own manuscript for publication. Decided to check another book, Cyber Disobedience (2014) Zero Books is a an "automated" publisher that "partners" with its authors - in other words, self-publishing. Searching "Jeff Shantz" + anarchy produced nothing. No notability whatsoever. Kudos to editor who noticed this longstanding WP:ADVERT.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:25, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this illuminating investigation. The possibility exists that the BLP is a hoax, constructed by an enemy of the subject with the intent to discredit him. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:26, 28 June 2017 (UTC).[reply]

I wouldn't go that far—his pubs are just in smaller journals that aren't indexed by JSTOR (some are Wiley, Sage, Palgrave Macmillan, others are open access/no publisher). And some pubs are under "Jeffrey/Jeffery". But even in considering his other capacity as an activist, there still isn't much written about him and his work, nevertheless enough to do justice to the topic in an encyclopedia article. czar 04:49, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He is, at the very least, listed in the Kwantlen directory, so a person of this name does exist. But the fact that many of his books are self-published and perhaps his journal is, as well (the link to "Punctum Books" is broken), is pretty conclusive for an academic. Agricola44 (talk) 12:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the prolific arguments presented over a prolific author: I agree that regardless of the number of texts- rather like this AFD- the quality, in terms of general breadth of notability, is lacking. — fortunavelut luna 14:03, 29 June 2017 (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.