Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James L. Hurley


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Enos733 (talk) 23:46, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

James L. Hurley

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Most sources go to the university website. Unless there is a policy that all university presidents are automatically notable, it's not clear to me why this page is here.--Literaturegirl (talk) 17:23, 30 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete I couldn't find much sources, and the previous presidents don't have an article and they don't seem to deserve an article. (Dominic F. Dottavio, Dennis P. McCabe. Thanks - RandomEditorAAA (talk) 15:48, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:05, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Note that this was not listed correctly until 6 October, so should not be closed until seven days have elapsed from then. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:09, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. Yes, there is. WP:PROF #6. "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society." The question is whether Tarleton State University falls into that category. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:20, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Pretty sure a 120-year-old American public university in the TAMU system is considered major. A WP:TROUT to the nom for this one... JoelleJay (talk) 16:41, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Snow keep. If you're not sure what the notability policy says you could, you know, look it up? In any case searching for his last name in combination with the names of the schools he has headed finds plenty of news coverage, as one would expect, and justifying the notability criterion in WP:PROF. The ease of finding news sources, in combination with the nominator's claim that "most sources" are primary, suggests that rather than performing WP:BEFORE the nominator only took a cursory look at the article itself. If we're handing out trouts, User:RandomEditorAAA's waxy comment deserves another. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:31, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Oh, good job finding purely local sources to save this article! Let's definitely all dump on the nominator instead of really evaluating the article's merit. Consider yourself trout smacked for scraping the bottom of the Google barrel. --Literaturegirl (talk) 19:29, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It's clear you still haven't read the relevant notability guideline. JoelleJay (talk) 19:38, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, I read the article and then I read the policy, then I read the article, then the policy, then I nominated the article for deletion. But, you're so right. You wise, all-knowledgeable editors are so right. Obviously, I did not understand the policy which says:


 * Having published work does not, in itself, make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are. Notability depends on the impact the work has had on the field of study. This notability guideline specifies criteria for judging the notability of an academic through reliable sources for the impact of their work.


 * So, yes, I thought that meant the college president had to have some kind of academic achievements. But what I now understand is that this policy protects college presidents with no achievements, except being college presidents, from having their pages deleted. The policy also says, "The criteria above are sometimes summed up as an "Average Professor Test": When judged against the average impact of a researcher in a given field, does this researcher stand out as clearly more notable or more accomplished?" Applying that test, this academic is entirely non-notable. Where are his books? Where are his scholarly articles, at the very least? And are you actually trying to make me laugh by saying, with an apparently straight face, that Tarleton is a major university? OMG, the Wikipedia spell checker didn't even recognize it.


 * STOP bullying people who disagree with you. --Literaturegirl (talk) 20:23, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * (EC) And yet there is this extremely straightforward instruction: The paragraph you quote applies to academics being assessed solely on C1 impact. I happen to agree that C6 gives a lot of leeway and presidents should really be evaluated the way CEOs are since their appointment is rarely achieved through actual academic impact. However, that is a discussion that must be brought at NPROF for consensus-building, not at individual deletions. The criteria for what constitutes "major" are not well-defined but prior AfDs have mostly affirmed long-standing public universities, especially those in the US, are sufficient. JoelleJay (talk) 20:51, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Nobody is bullying anyone, but merely saying that due diligence (such as making sure that you understand the relevant guidelines) should be taken with deletion nominations. Is the Board of Regents of the Texas A&M University System in the habit of appointing nobodies to lead universities? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:10, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes WP:PROF. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 19:31, 7 October 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.