Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John A. Matzko


 * 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.  Sandstein  17:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

John A. Matzko

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject does not meet enwp threashold for notability. Just a typical career professor -- subject is a department chair, but it is not a named or distinguished chair as mandated by WP:ACADEMIC. Plus, more than half the sources in the article are attributed to the subject himself. —Eustress talk 12:43, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:38, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Lots of sources, several of them third-party. He seems somewhat notable, and this to be a threshold case. I thought I read somewhere on here that chaired professors are generally notable, but I can't recall the guideline/policy (or maybe essay) that stated it. I reserve the right to change my opinion. St John Chrysostom ΔόξατωΘεώ 04:25, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please reconsider. 3/9 refs are to personal websites, and another 3 are to the professor's university. Regarding chairship, I pointed out in the nom that according to WP:ACADEMIC, chairs must be named chairs, which his is not... and even if it were, it wouldn't be enough to meet the notability threshold since he's at a non-major university. (Again, see the policy.) —Eustress talk 13:21, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep only. His post as chairman of a division is a senior post, which would in UK (where not every academic is a professor) be held by a professor, perhaps with the title Dean of Social Science.  The list of publications also suggests that he is just about notable.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:28, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please reconsider. In the U.S., a department chair is inferior to a dean; and policy says chairship does not connote notability. Regarding the publications, none of them are notable or have been cited widely. —Eustress talk 17:05, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not familar with American academic titles. However a "division" sounded to me like rather more than a department.  I see from this page] that the division is one of six in the School of Arts and Sciences, which is headed by a Dean.  Nevertheless, I will stand by "weak keep".  I would not go higher.  We need comments from other editors, not a repetition of the view of the nom.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:31, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Three articles listed in the Web of Science, none of them cited even once. WoS is of course not very good in this area, but GScholar does not turn up much more (just click the link above). Note that these articles are perhaps even authored by a different person with the same name, as they don't seem to be in the same field. Broadening the search to "Matzko J" does not improve matters. None of the other sources seem to provide enough independent coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. Being department chair at a large university normally means that if you search, you'll probably find something to show notability (although being department chair in itself is not enough to satisfy WP:PROF). However, Matzko is not at a major university, so it is perhaps less surprising that we can't find much. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 10:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:ACADEMIC. His alleged arguably unsavoury comments in connection with also come in up searches, but have apparently not been reported in reliable sources. -- Trevj (talk) 11:30, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete some time evaluating sources confirms Guillaume2303's view that his academic publishing is quite far from meeting WP:PROF. Eluchil404 (talk) 13:32, 30 March 2012 (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.