Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naomi Scheman

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 with some regret. Achieving tenure at an American university is a major accomplishment, but in and of itself it does not establish notability as required here. I did some investigation of Dr. Scheman's accomplishments before allowing for a Delete consensus. First, the award listing "2006 Fessler-Lampert Chair in the Humanities"; there is a "Fesler Lampert Chair" at the University of Minnesota, but it is in aging studies and Dr. Scheman is not one of the three current co-holders of the chair (ext. link). Second, none of Dr. Scheman's writing credits are books; rather they are book chapters or papers included in compendia. Third, it is clear from the Stanford Encyclopedia article that Dr. Scheman has some influence in current philosophical thought; but her contributions are limited extensions from the work of Wittgenstein and do not appear to set her apart from her peers as a thought leader. These things taken together would appear to not satisfy the requirements of WP:PROFTEST. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naomi Scheman

complete nomination by anon SYSS Mouse 03:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 05:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak delete - currently nothing to show she passes WP:PROFTEST, but she may well do so. The comment on the talk page "I am trying to create this page for a group project in one of Naomi's philosophy classes" doesn't bode well, though. - iridescenti (talk to me!) 09:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - promotional article, no assertion of encyclopedic notability made, no indication she passes either WP:N or the relevant subject-specific guidelines. Moreschi ^{Request a recording?} 11:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Her achievements appear to be those of an average competent college professor, and I don't think she's notable enough to require an article. -FisherQueen (Talk) 20:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Not completely obscure, but I'm not convinced she meets WP:PROF yet; maybe in a decade or so. Brianyoumans 20:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable enough for me and of interest to many people. Xanucia 22:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The bio (apparently done by an enthusiastic student) ommited a few details. She has served as Associate Dean of the Graduate School at Minnesota, and she's also been chair of the women's Studies Department. She is a full professor at Minnesota, and Minnesota is a major research university. She is a member of the Austrian Studies Program--presumably as a Wittgenstein specialist. She's edited a book, and published a chapter in another, that they forgot to list, She's held a few important university positions there , including member of the Center for Bioethics,.... . In general full professors at major universities are notable, for they will have done much more than the "average professor" The average professor in the humanities publishes one book or maybe a few articles. To become a tenured professor at Minnesota, she certainly needed to have written a good deal beyond that. She has published one book, edited another ,and written considerable parts of four. She has passed several external reviews by experts for their notability in the profession for appointment and promotion. We don't establish notability in WP, we see if the profession has established notability. More if I find some. DGG 01:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This sentence from the article sums it up for me (emphasis mine):She is best known on the University of Minnesota campus for her "Sexuality and Self-Image" course in the women's studies department. She is also well known among University of Minnesota students for her introductory logic class. She also gives an introductory course in scientific ethics at the Physics Department there. Off campus she's pretty much unknown. Anynobody 07:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Bellczar 23:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article is poorly sourced and gives little evidence of notability. Furthermore, there are massive conflict of interest issues and much of the page appears to be copied from her bio from the Women Studies department.[1] I believe that many, perhaps even most, full professors at the University of Minnesota are notable, so I would not oppose a recreation of this article from scratch if a user not connected to her can make a well-sourced case for her notability.--FreeKresge 04:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I used some information from official web pages. The subject's presentation of objective data on official web pages about professional details is generally acceptable. The difficulty writing this article, in fact, was that the pages were not sufficiently informative. I have no personal connection with the subject, have never heard of her before seeing this article, have no particular interest in her academic field, have no connection with the University of Minnesota. Indeed, I discuss the dfficulty posed by he naive writing by her apparent students. That's why I rewrote the article. The information about her research and writing and service is what proves her notability. ' DGG 06:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sources establishing notability must be independent of the subject of the article. After all, many people pad their resumes to make their accomplishments look more important than they really are. The number of publications is not impressive if it represents the sum total of her published scholarship. There is no evidence in the article that any of the publications has been particularly influential.--FreeKresge 18:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per iridescenti and ors thewinchester 04:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, there is nothing here that makes her notable above your average professor. I'm sure she has an on-campus following, but that doesn't do anything for WP:PROF. --Mus Musculus 05:12, 10 April 2007 (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.