[WikiEN-l] Improper speedy taggings

Fri Sep 16 17:55:41 UTC 2005

On 9/16/05, Snowspinner <Snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
> For what it's worth, I disagree. I think that in an encyclopedia,
> which values peer-reviewed sources and academic knowledge
> particularly highly, there is a real case to be made that professors
> at accredited universities are notable. The way I see it, pretty much
> all professors, whether PhDs, JDs, or whatever, have made some sort
> of contribution to their field - law review articles, dissertations,
> other publications. If we're the sum total of human knowledge, we'd
> cover all those contributions. Thus articles on the professors seem
> sensible by default.
> 
> I'll go one further, in fact. I think everyone who has been main or
> sole author on a publication in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal
> deserves a Wikipedia article. Yes, this would include a whole lot of
> grad students. But if they're making or have made verifiable
> contributions to their field, we should be including them. No question.

My brother was one of three main authors of a published article in a
peer-reviewed scholarly journal as an <u>undergrad</u> student.  But
there's no way I would agree that he deserves an article on that basis
alone.

Combine that with his name on several patents as inventor or
co-inventor, that he's a highly desired public speaker in one of his
fields of expertise, the books he's credited in, and the books he's in
the process of writing and I think he's getting closer.

But based on a single article?  That seems a little extreme to me.  If
you felt the compulsion, it would be better to summarize each of the
thousands of peer reviewed journal articles themselves and mention
each otherwise not-notable-enough-for-an-article-of-their-own authors
there.

-- 
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused