Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riccardo Bavaj


 * 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  08:59, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Riccardo Bavaj

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

does not meet academic notability criteria Sansculotte93 (talk) 14:34, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 April 8.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 14:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Notability criteria not met in the article:

1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

There is no indication of this in the article.

2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.

The awards mentioned are all doctoral and research fellowships, which do not qualify as 'highly prestigious'

3. The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society for which that is a highly selective honor (e.g., the IEEE).

Fellowship of the Royal Historical Society does not seem to meet this criteria. Fellowship of the HEA is commonplace in UK HE institutions.

4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.

No indication of this.

5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research (or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon).

No

6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society.

No

7. The person has made substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.

No

8. The person is or has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area.

No

9. The person is in a field of literature (e.g., writer or poet) or the fine arts (e.g., musician, composer, artist), and meets the standards for notability in that art, such as WP:CREATIVE or WP:MUSIC.

No Sansculotte93 (talk) 19:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — Nizolan  (talk) 21:43, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. — Nizolan  (talk) 21:43, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. — Nizolan  (talk) 21:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep -- Fellowships of R Hist Soc imply some recognition by his peers of his standing as a historian. The Society also has memberships, which are less prestigious.  However my main reason for keeping is a significant output of academic history books.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Publishing books is necessary, but what counts is that they be noted by others. WP:Too Soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:30, 22 April 2016 (UTC).

Editors and administrators may want to consider the following evidence:       — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.62.227 (talk) 08:14, 22 April 2016 (UTC)  — 86.182.62.227 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete as still questionable for the applicable notability and I'm not seeing anything else convincing. Asking for analysis.  SwisterTwister   talk  04:57, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. FRHistS is too unselective for notability and no other indication of notability under WP:GNG or WP:PROF is evident. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:00, 23 April 2016 (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.