Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Henretta


 * 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 speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator, no other delete votes. (non-admin closure) power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 20:40, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

James Henretta

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Delete There is no significant coverage of the author outside of his own writings. Therefore, the general notability guideline is not met. Glenn984 (talk) 22:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Withdrawn by nominator The author does meet the notability guidelines. Glenn984 (talk) 22:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Glenn984 (talk) 22:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Glenn984 (talk) 22:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - looks to me like he meets WP:PROF and it's vaguely expressed 'average professor test'. His textbook, America's History, has run through at least 9 editions, and I am finding several book reviews that are focusing not just on his books but on his career, including one entitled, "Will the Real James Henretta Please Stand Up?" which in and of itself suggests he is better known than the 'average professor' and another that calls him, "one of the leading colonial historians of the current generation". Agricolae (talk) 23:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Just having a textbook doesn't clearly provide a standard of notability. Many professors have written textbooks, but there's no clear evidence he's above the average professor, especially since his textbooks are his most prominent work. There are numerous textbook authors without Wikipedia pages.

With regards to the article "Will the Real James Henretta Please Stand Up?", the quote you cite does not appear to be in the document even with a text search. Also, this article is just an isolated commentary on a book, which is also quite common and average for a professor. Besides this article and mentions online, there is very little information about him that would make him notable. If he truly made a "significant impact in [his] scholarly discipline" as set forth in WP:PROF, there would be much more coverage. Glenn984 (talk) 00:19, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You are aware that book reviews contribute to author notability, right, Glenn984? You've also included a general WP:WAX argument and that guys your rebuttal. He doesn't need to be above the "average professor" as that individual is in your mind. He simply needs to meet any notability criteria. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 10:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep When a JSTOR search for book reviews for "James Henretta" turns up almost 200 results, with the first one being "Will the Real James Henretta Please Stand Up?" and with the third one being "Forty Years of Salutary Neglect: A Retrospective" concerning one of his books, I think we can say that WP:AUTHOR is clearly met without even going into detail on the many reviews of his books, and that the nominator's claim that "There is no significant coverage of the author outside of his own writings" is so blatantly false as to call into question whether the nominator made any attempt at WP:BEFORE. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, 6 contributions with over 100 citations in a low citation field make this clearly a very well known professor that passes NPROF without question. --hroest 02:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep but improve: the article was created by a sockpuppet of User:Novonium, but escaped deletion because there had been some work done on it by other editors, but it still bears the Novonium hallmarks of not saying much of interest. That "Will the real JH stand up" could be a useful addition, as a book review which discusses JH, and the "Forty years.." mentioned above shows that scholars were talking about him 40 years later and would be useful for expanding the article (Perkins, Edwin J. “FORTY YEARS OF ‘SALUTARY NEGLECT’: A RETROSPECTIVE.” Reviews in American History, vol. 40, no. 3, 2012, pp. 370–375., www.jstor.org/stable/41678577. Accessed 9 Mar. 2021.). (Too much to do today in RL to be able to SOFIXIT). Pam  D  09:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, have added Perkins ref. Now need to talk to estate agent and lawyer about house sale completion date etc. Over to you. Pam  D  09:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep as the reviews exist for author notability and there is enough coverage and a fellowship to argue for academic notability as well. Article needs improvement, but that's not AfD's purpose. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 10:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Keep My apologies. It seems I've been mistaken on the rules for article deletion. Glenn984 (talk) 14:03, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. You need to strike your nomination with a note that you withdraw it, I believe. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 15:34, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

 Speedy Keep definitely meets WP:PROF. Notable.--Kemalcan (talk) 08:56, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Per all above. Over 100 citations for multiple publications. Best, GPL93 (talk) 03:16, 11 March 2021 (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.