Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eleanor Mannikka


 * 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. Consensus is that the available coverage of the book written by the subject doesn't make the subject notable. If someone does want to write an article about the book then I would be happy to restore this page as a redirect.  Hut 8.5  16:33, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Eleanor Mannikka

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

DePRODed. Concern was: ''No claim of notability. She doesn't meet WP:NPROF, and her book isn't notable either.'' The references added are fleeting mentions and are not about Mannikka. Fails WP:PROF. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:36, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * JSTOR finds four scholarly reviews of the book, and one book review by her. Feel free to reformat the following infodump as you wish:

Review Angkor Wat: Time Space and Kingship by Eleanor Mannikka Review by: Elizabeth Moore Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 61, No. 1 (1998), pp. 191-192 JOURNAL ARTICLE Download PDF Add To My Lists Cite This Item Review: Angkor Wat: Time, Space and Kingship by Review Angkor Wat: Time, Space and Kingship by Eleanor Mannikka Review by: Nora A. Taylor Ars Orientalis, Vol. 28, 75th Anniversary of the Freer Gallery of Art (1998), pp. 126-128 JOURNAL ARTICLE Download PDF Add To My Lists Cite This Item Review: The Integrative Art of Modern Thailand by Review The Integrative Art of Modern Thailand by Herbert P. Phillips Review by: Eleanor Mannikka Ars Orientalis, Vol. 22 (1992), pp. 164-165 JOURNAL ARTICLE Download PDF Add To My Lists Cite This Item Review: Angkor Wat: Time, Space and Kingship by Review Angkor Wat: Time, Space and Kingship by Eleanor Mannikka Review by: George Michell Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Third Series, Vol. 8, No. 1 (Apr., 1998), pp. 133-134 JOURNAL ARTICLE Download PDF Add To My Lists Cite This Item Review: Angkor Wat: Time, Space, and Kingship. by Review Angkor Wat: Time, Space, and Kingship. by Eleanor Mannikka Review by: Helene Legendre de Koninck Pacific Affairs, Vol. 71, No. 2 (Summer, 1998), pp. 279-280 JOURNAL ARTICLE

HenryFlower 21:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  04:07, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  04:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  04:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. The book reviews go some way towards WP:AUTHOR, and the article on the book in Times Higher Education convinces me that it is a significant book, but with only one significant book it's not enough. And the case for WP:PROF looks nonexistent. As far as I can tell she began working at IUP in 2001, as of the 2009-2010 catalog  was still listed as an assistant professor, had no important publications in that period (the book came before), and then seems to have left campus. In 2011 she self-published a non-significant UFO book, "Hidden Valley, Hidden Mind". And that's all I can find. Not enough in the way of independent reliable sources for a real biography, not enough significant work to make a BIO1E-compliant article about the work instead of about her, all the appearance of a failed academic career, and WP:FRINGE problems to boot. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:08, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sources inadequate. At best WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:33, 26 June 2017 (UTC).
 * Delete: fails WP:PROF and WP:AUTHOR - GretLomborg (talk) 20:36, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I found and added 2 RS reviews. Still not ready to !vote, though. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:46, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   22:37, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Soft delete by redirecting. The book is likely notable, but one book does not make the author notable. Google Scholar suggests her research is not cited and has little impact; the book has 60+ cites, but her next work, just 3. I would however sugest a soft delete by redirecting to an article about the book; which could be stubbed with the one sentence from the bio, with sources found here added to further reading. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 22:42, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:AUTHOR says it's sufficient to have created "a significant or well-known work" so one notable book would certainly be enough. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. one significant book is not enough. that is how the WP:PROF stanfard has been interpreted.   DGG ( talk ) 07:50, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 8 July 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.