Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Jefferson Davis


 * 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.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 04:29, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

John Jefferson Davis

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article was deproded, but still appears to fail WP:ACADEMIC. I have been unable to find reliable sources to satisfy the notability requirements for an academic. Google scholar search turns up some citations, but not significant enough number to quality for WP:ACADEMIC. The largest number of cites scholar turns up are 33 to a single book entitled, "Evangelical ethics: issues facing the church today." The next highest cited was only 17 for a book entitled, "Evangelical Ethics." Some false hits turn up for a different scholar in the early 20th century who writes about parasitic fungi. Overall the citations do not appear significant enough to establish notability. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 16:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Userfy if someone will take it. Currently no indication of wp:notability, but it's a brand new article.  Ability to establish wp:notabity looks unklikely but possible.  Too soon to tell for a article that is just a few days old.  North8000 (talk) 17:46, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Well, I've known his name for years. I think he's quite well known in his field - as witnessed by the debates with which he's involved. So WP:ACADEMIC is not the only guideline - his name yields 66,000 GHits. I also note that a book published by Holy Cross Orthodox Press features an essay responding to him, so he's not known just in evangelical circles. StAnselm (talk) 19:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. I find GS cites to be 33, 17, 15, 13, 11, 8, 5.. to give an h index of 6. Barely adequate for WP:Prof, even for a low cited field. Is there anything else? I note that a lot of BLPs on the staff of this institution have recently been written. If this is being done at the behest of the institution it should be warned that this can be a recipe for humiliation. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC).
 * Yes, and they're a mixed bag. Some are obviously notable (presidents, named chairs) and some are not notable (Jeffrey Niehaus?, Roy Ciampa?). And with this one, I'm not sure. I've heard his name a lot, and seen his books, and so I expect that he's notable. StAnselm (talk) 23:20, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment There is also some Google News coverage. -- 202.124.75.235 (talk) 00:00, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Not all of those hits are about this person. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:11, 27 August 2011 (UTC).


 * Keep. Actually, it's the Google News coverage that enables me to vote keep. Some of it is pay-per-view, but it looks like we have multiple sources providing non-trivial coverage. StAnselm (talk) 00:46, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I looked through the google news results and can't find anything significant (I found 3 or 4 articles where he is quoted peripherally) that refers to THIS John Jefferson Davis. Could you provide a few links to the articles you have found that you believe are this guy and are significant coverage?  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:53, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I was thinking particularly of the article in the Boston Globe, but there were quite a few others. The news results indicate he is often asked by the mainstream media to give his opinion on various issues. StAnselm (talk) 01:26, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment -- The problem with this artiucle is that it is a mere stub. If he had a list of what he has published, it ought to be possible to tell whehter he is a notable academic or merly a lecturer.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:50, 27 August 2011 (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.