Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Vervaeke (2nd nomination)


 * 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. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 08:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

John Vervaeke
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

An academic whose lectures enjoy some popularity and who has some trace in the literature. What I cannot find, however, is any discussion of him. here doesn't seem to be enough out there to write more than what would be found in a faculty directory. Mangoe (talk) 14:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I started the page so can be blamed for whatever's wrong with it. :p What do you mean by a discussion of him? Do you mean personal life info, or interviews, or profiles on him? Cheers! --RT Wolf (talk) 17:29, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, any of the above. We need someone else to say "Vervaeke's theory of 'X' was of signal importance in our understanding of 'Y'", that sort of thing. Mangoe (talk) 17:41, 16 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. A GS h-index of 8 is not really enough in a fairly popular field. Too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:55, 16 April 2013 (UTC).
 * Keep because he's an important professor at one of the top 20 institutions on the planet. He teaches 4 out of the required 8 courses in the only Buddhist psychology program in North America, and teaches the introductory and higher-level courses in the cognitive science program, too, as well as teaching in the psychology department. None of these courses are taught from a textbook. Basically he's central to two programs at UofT that would be crippled without him, and has served as the Associate Director for the Cognitive Science program. Though his main impact has been at UofT he also teaches at York University so he's had an impact on multiple institutions of higher education. -- RT Wolf (talk) 19:09, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. Every professor's teaching is assessed, largely subjectively. This was basically the argument made by David Eppstein in the first Afd of this article. Agricola44 (talk) 15:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC).


 * Delete per Xxan. Teaching, while a noble and honorable profession, is not one of those things that automatically merit notability. There appears to be no serious grounds for notability aside from WP:PROF, and there he falls below our standards for psychologists. Reasonable people might choose not to believe that Toronto is one of the 20 most important institutions on the planet. Ray  Talk 22:23, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: Low h-index means that the sources will have to clearly demonstrate extraordinary accomplishments in the field to meet the requirements of WP:PROF. The sources provided fall far short of this. WP:PROF is the only possible guideline that this individual could have met. The material on the rest of his life is scanty and does not contribute to notability. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 09:12, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. WoS shows citation count list of 14, 9, 8, 4, 0, 0...Add to this that he is not the corresponding author on any of the cited papers and that he is a junior an adjunct faculty member, and WP:TOOSOON seems spot on. Agricola44 (talk) 15:19, 22 April 2013 (UTC).
 * Delete. I don't see a reason to change my delete opinion for the first AfD. The sources are different this time around, but not of any higher quality. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:57, 23 April 2013 (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.