Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Radzilowski


 * 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The result was nomination withdrawn and no !votes for Deletion. sufficient independent reviews to pass NAUTHOR SNG. (non-admin closure) Icewhiz (talk) 07:47, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

John Radzilowski

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't pass GNG. Rarely cited, this museum guide and professor at the Ketchikan, Alaska campus (a former community college) of University of Alaska Southeast is not close to passing WP:NPROF.Icewhiz (talk) 06:32, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 06:33, 22 January 2019 (UTC).
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 06:33, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 06:33, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Recipients of the Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland are likely to be notable (per (WP:ANYBIO#1). Further, while his citation record as seen on GScholar is not great (low double digits at best) and while I concur he likely does not pass WP:PROF, he is the author of quite a few books (see ) which is likely sufficient for WP:AUTHOR. I think the award + numerous book publications push him into being notable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 15:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The order of merit is a low ranking award in the Polish system (see list in Orders, decorations, and medals of Poland). Just authoring a number of books is not sufficient for AUTHOR (particularly in this age of self published and easily published books) - AUTHOR(3) states - "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." - which seems to be a stretch in relation to these books. Icewhiz (talk) 15:25, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Some of his books are published by quite reliable scholarly publishers like Minnesota Historical Society or Routledge. He is a co-author of an encyclopedia (American Immigration: An Encyclopedia of Political, Social, and Cultural Change: An Encyclopedia of Political, Social, and Cultural Change, 11 cites). His research and activities are significant enough for Collection: John Radzilowski papers to be made available at the UofM. I disagree he is a minor historian, he seems to be referenced quite often in discussion of Polish-American history. He is important enough to be invited to be reported on by the Polish Embassy in the USA and give lectures in the National Museum of Poland . To me this is more than being a no-name, nobody scholar who has nothing but an unimpressive CV to show. PS. Also, let's consider that our notability guidelines are generally too permissive or sport biographies, and too restrictive for academic. Kick a ball and you are notable, publish several books, get a government award and it is unclear? Sigh. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  16:13, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Papers regarding to his lobbying efforts for minor Polish-American institutions. Speaking to high school and university students in Poland (your pl.usembassy link) or giving a lecture (on the same visit in Poland marking the 100 years of Polish-American relations - on a temporary exhibit on US/Polish relations marking 100 years) at the Cinema MUZ in the Warsaw museum are not an indication of notability.... A Tetyana Filevska (CV here - born 1983, PhD, last entry - a guide) - gave a lecture in the same hall. Academics give lectures all the time. Icewhiz (talk) 16:27, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Not invited lectures. Those are given only by high profile academics. Oh, also the various links mention do indicate coverage that may suffice him to pass regular BIO. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 16:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passees WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR.--Darwinek (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. - as per the argumentation above. GizzyCatBella (talk) 05:07, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Searching JSTOR finds 14 published reviews of his books            , enough for WP:AUTHOR. (It is not through writing many books, but through other people writing many reviews of those books, that one passes.) —David Eppstein (talk) 07:15, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment – Looks like another nominator not willing to drop the stick, but that's not why I came here. Since the nomination is largely based upon the notion that he's some yokel up here in hillbilly bumfuck Alaska, you would think that WP:ALASKA might want the opportunity to chime in.  Both of the deletion pages relevant to that project are lacking this discussion.  Part of that appears to be a matter of the article being tagged for WP United States, as if it didn't matter that WP Alaska exists as an independent project or that there was no consensus to merge into the larger WP when the discussion occurred about seven years ago or so.  I haven't had the time necessary to root out and correct incorrectly-tagged pages in probably the past two or three years.  There's been a lot of this sort of thing, such as the recent case of another WP not being informed of an RFC affecting the project's main article.  Why do we even have WikiProjects anymore if we have so many editors treating them as if they exist purely for show? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  02:24, 25 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passees WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR Lobbying effort was for NATO membership for Poland/Hungary/Czech Rep. not for "minor organization". Haiman medal is the highest honor in the field of Polish diaspora studies. The comment that University of Alaska Southeast is "former community college" is an ad hominem argument. It is a fully accredited four year university and has been for decades. AK Piast (talk) 04:18, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't feel too bad about the dis. I have heard a supposedly-sane academic administrator argue (apparently seriously) that NYU should be considered at the level of a former community college. So you're in good company. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:10, 25 January 2019 (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.