Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffery D. Long


 * 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 no consensus. Barkeep49 (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Jeffery D. Long

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable. The sourcing of this BLP is extremely weak, consisting of a) texts by Long, b) the directory of his workplace, Elizabethtown College, c) a general link to FindArticles.com, and d) a non-critical review, or description, of one of Long's books, by "Elizabethtown College" (?), which ends in a puff for Elizabethtown College. Trying to find some reliable secondary sources online, I could locate only a positive review in Swarajya (magazine), a somewhat notorious right-wing journal which is blacklisted on Wikipedia. Bishonen &#124; tålk 14:25, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment. The cite count on Scholar looks a little wonky to me. I suspect that the cites for his contribution to The Oxford Handbook of World Philosophy cover the citations for every chapter in the book, not just his individual chapter. So I'd be inclined to disregard that particular paper for purposes of WP:NPROF. (Although being asked to write a chapter for an Oxford handbook always seems like good evidence that one is viewed as an authority.) AleatoryPonderings (talk) 14:55, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  15:00, 11 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. Jainism: An Introduction looks to be his most important book, but I could only find one review of it and one highly-cited book is probably not enough for WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NPROF. Couldn't find reviews for his other books either. I know citation counts aren't super helpful for a discipline like religious studies, but without reviews there doesn't seem like a good case for either of the two relevant SNGs. (It initially looks like Historical Dictionary of Hinduism gets lots of reviews, but all the reviews I saw were for a different edition (or perhaps different book entirely) edited by Bruce M. Sullivan.) AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Theology is a very low-cited area and I think this one just passes WP:NPROFC#1. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC).
 * Weak delete per AP above, and per nom. I cannot find any substantive independent sourcing, and it's very clear he doesn't pass GNG. I do not see his work having had sufficient impact to meet WP:PROF, either, but it's a little fuzzier there. Vanamonde (Talk) 01:58, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 04:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 04:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I agree with AleatoryPonderings that the Oxford handbook chapter citations appear to be erroneous -- I examined a few of the papers listed by GS as citing, and did not see any citations whatsoever of the handbook (even to other chapters).  However, the citations of Jainism: An Introduction seem to be genuine, and there are a moderate number of citations to other articles.  In a very low citation field, this is starting to look like a borderline pass of WP:NPROF C1.  I was surprised not to find more reviews of the subject's books, but both Jainism: An Introduction and Historical Dictionary of Hinduism are held by 1400+ libraries according to WorldCat; I think this helps support the weak NPROF case. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:22, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Neutral at the moment - but I might change to delete if clear evidence of notability can't be provided. The citations from his own books need to come out pronto. Deb (talk) 09:52, 12 October 2020 (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.