Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph L. Price


 * 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 keep. Because of baseball, apparently.  Sandstein  11:41, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Joseph L. Price

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:PROF - sources are trivial and not independent, there is no evidence of a significant body of work, about all we can say from the reliable independent sources is that this is a man who teaches at a minor college and seems to be a nice chap. Guy (Help!) 11:03, 11 September 2015 (UTC) Guy (Help!) 11:03, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 20:23, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 20:24, 11 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. First, he holds a named chair and Whittier arguably meets the second prong of selective institution for WP:PROF 5. Second, his book on Tillich and his book "From Season to Season: Sports as American Religion" both seem to be highly cited. I expect his other work is as well. --Samuel J. Howard (talk) 22:18, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't really think that anyone would call Whittier, a self described liberal arts college, a major institution of higher education and research. --Bejnar (talk) 03:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Except perhaps for readers of WP:NACADEMICS which says "Major institutions, for these purposes, are those that have a reputation for excellence or selectivity." Whittier has a reputation for excellence... except perhaps for its law school.--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 14:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Using an objective measure of "excellence", in 2015 Forbes rates Whitter College as #331 Overall, #240 in Private Colleges, and #64 in the West. Forbes rated 650 colleges and universities, #331 places Whitter below 50%, near the top of the bottom half. That does not sound like the kind of excellence the guideline is talking about. That is down from #215 in 2010 here. Excellent schools include Pomona College, a direct competitor with Whitter, at #1. See the top one hundred here. That does not mean that one cannot get a good education at Whitter College, it just means that it does not meet the bright-line rule of WP:NACADEMICS. --Bejnar (talk) 19:11, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * US News and World Report on the other hand, says "[Whittier] is selective...". They rank the school as 124 among National Liberal Arts Colleges. Washington Monthly ranks Whittier at 74. Both rankings substantially better than Forbes's rankings. Given the subjectivity of college rankings, one can hardly call any use of them a bright-line test. From Peterson's guide to colleges we read:"Whittier has earned a reputation for providing a high-quality liberal arts education. The Princeton Review recently named Whittier as one of the country's best institutions for undergraduate education, and it included Whittier in the 2015 edition of 'The Best 379 Colleges.' Whittier is also among 200 schools listed in "Colleges of Distinction," a national college guidebook that showcases colleges who have engaged students, great teaching, a vibrant community, and successful outcomes.". Finally, ironically, this list of "overrated" colleges testifies to the fact that Whittier has an excellent reputation, a necessary condition of being overrated.--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 19:30, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * 124 among National Liberal Arts Colleges is again in the lower 50%. And maybe you are unclear as to what "overrated" means. You do not have to have a good reputation to be overrated. It just means that you are not as good as you are being rated, which in this case is not that good even at #74 in the Washington Monthly. Whitter College is just not a major institution of higher education and research. --Bejnar (talk) 17:00, 25 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete his claim to fame is that he has appeared on television and been a guest speaker on NPR. That does not indicate that he has had a substantial impact outside academia in his academic capacity. He does not meet any of the criteria for WP:NACADEMICS.  And, no, Whittier College is not a major institution of higher education and research, it is a small liberal arts college with a total enrollment of about 2,000.  He lacks the kind of coverage that would support a "substantial impact" analysis. --Bejnar (talk) 03:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ☮ JAaron95  Talk   15:43, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - Setting aside whether this subject meets the SNG for Academics, or whether Whittier is big or little, this strikes me as a GNG pass for a recognized national expert in "Baseball Studies." HERE is an interview with Price, the Co-Director of Whittier's Institute of Baseball Studies, on MLB.com, the website of professional baseball. And HERE is the website of the University of Chicago on Price and his quest to sing the national anthem at every MLB park. And THIS from the website of the AARP, on the same topic. THIS is Price being cited as an expert by Time magazine back in 2007. HERE we have the official website of Minor League Baseball on Price's singing the national anthem 100 times in a summer. And so on and so forth. It's a simple GNG pass here; don't overthink this. Carrite (talk) 05:34, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per Carrite. This is one where we should inhibit our impulses to judge why someone is notable. He's getting prominent coverage for his particular interests in baseball -- that does it. Stevie is the man!  Talk • Work 12:01, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep No matter what we may think about his reasons for notability, there is ample coverage here. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 22:44, 25 September 2015 (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.