Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert B. 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 keep. Eddie891 Talk Work 18:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Robert B. Davis

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A person only notable as a university professor does not look notable to me. It also relies on mostly primary sources too. – Cupper 52 Discuss! 16:59, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.

– Cupper 52 Discuss! 16:59, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.

– Cupper 52 Discuss! 16:59, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep: seems to me a clear keep as WP:prof notable and the material here http://www2.scc.rutgers.edu/ead/uarchives/davis2f.html, now in the article, useful for some additions (Msrasnw (talk) 17:25, 29 January 2021 (UTC))
 * Keep. Article needs more thorough sourcing but this looks like a pass of WP:PROF (founding editor of a journal which is arguable notable although we have no article on it), of #C5 ("New Jersey Professor of Mathematics Education at Rutgers University"), and plausibly also of #C1 (heavy citations for "Constructivist Views on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics" and "The notion of limit: Some seemingly unavoidable misconception stages") and #C7 (through both the effects of the Madison project on elementary-level education can be documented and his work as mathematics advisor to Sesame Street). And the nominator's rationale seems to boil down to "people cannot be notable for being professors" which is just incorrect. The primary nature of the sources is irrelevant to academic notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:01, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I added 13 reviews of 3 books to the article, so he also passes WP:AUTHOR. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:36, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, per the comments above and, I am tempted to say, per nom: "only notable as a university professor." We do have an entire notability guideline, WP:PROF, dealing specifically with notability of university professors. I have added a ref to the subject's bio in the 13th edition of the American Men and Women of Science (the source is mentioned in the Phil Church's bio of Davis and I looked it up using my university library online access, although the item is currently behind a paywall.) In addition to WP:PROF I believe the subject passes WP:BIO as well. Nsk92 (talk) 18:12, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Plus, Davis' work on the Madison Project is discussed in detail on pp. 51-55 of this book, a ref to which I have added to the article. Nsk92 (talk) 20:10, 29 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes multiple criteria of WP:PROF, when even one would be sufficient. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 19:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:PROFDavidstewartharvey (talk) 07:53, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY - based on what's in the article right now, he passes PROF and/or AUTHOR. Good work by . Bearian (talk) 21:04, 1 February 2021 (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.