Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teresita A. Levy


 * 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. The delete arguments which I explain how the article does not meet the notability guidelines are stronger than the keep arguments, which do not successfully refute the delete arguments. Davewild (talk) 06:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Teresita A. Levy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable professional. This woman seems to be a nice professor and researcher, but it seems she's not notable enough to be covered by third part sources. The article references are just trivial mention of her doing her work, article written by herself and a book about a tangential topic. damiens.rf 12:52, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - You are right, she does seem too be a nice professor and researcher. However, her published book "Puerto Ricans in the Empire; Tobacco Growers and U.S. Colonialism" the first book which tells how Puerto Ricans challenged United States officials and fought successfully for legislation that benefited the island. Her book has been praised by scholars, here is an example:

Tony the Marine (talk) 17:24, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Those seem to be trivial accolades for a nice work. Sorry. --damiens.rf 17:59, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - Her notability may be not super high, but given she represents a "different side of the story," I say lets err on the side of caution. Peacedance (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It sounds like you're conceding that there's a lack of notability, but that you want to keep the article based on something different: what you're calling a "different side of the story". Could you be more specific? I don't know what you mean by this. Agricola44 (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2015 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak delete -- the vote is weak but I strongly object to the rhetoric of "nice" by damiens.rf which is often used as a code for dismissing the work of female academics and female academics of color in particular. She is a serious, up and coming scholar publishing serious work that has been noticed very positively by her peers. The vote is delete, however, because the bar is rather high for assistant professors; she almost clears it with book holdings (135 institutions), but for an assistant professor in the humanities I'd like to see at least 200 or 300 in the absence of a major award. There's little harm in keeping the article, because given her position, she will likely clear the threshold in four to five years, but for now precedent says delete. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 04:41, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I think you're reading sexism where it doesn't exist. Having personally been a victim of it in the job market, I like to think I am more sensitive to spotting this than the average person, but I'm increasingly concerned that WP eds see "misogyny behind every tree" (as I commented at another recent AfD) and that this trend only serves to trivialize the whole matter. Agricola44 (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2015 (UTC).

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  &#40; Talk &#41;  13:56, 30 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - the recognition extended by Cesar Ayala to Ms. Levy is far from "trivial." Ayala is an established & internationally renowned professor, and author of two definitive books about Puerto Rican agricultural history. Sarason (talk) 02:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. In academia, one's PhD thesis is not considered a "published book". In essence, the Rutger's Press book is her PhD dissertation (perhaps with added material/analysis) in published form. This is standard procedure in the humanities area of academia. Agricola44 (talk) 17:47, 1 July 2015 (UTC).
 * I disagree with this. It is not uncommon for a PhD dissertation to be re-worked as a published book, but it is still a published book, and not a PhD dissertation, which exists in another form. There are many, many dissertations which are not published as books, and the publishers who publish academic works are not indiscriminate in which books they publish. It only makes sense that once someone has done the research that it takes to write a dissertation (which must present new data) that the research becomes the basis for a book on the topic. LaMona (talk) 22:09, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It seems we agree that the book "Puerto Ricans in the empire: tobacco growers and U.S. colonialism" from Rutgers University Press is published. It is her dissertation "The history of tobacco cultivation in Puerto Rico, 1899-1940" which is not considered to be a published book. Dissertations are internal documents written to satisfy a curricular requirement. It is true that not every humanities dissertation winds up being published, but it is true that a published dissertation is all but a requirement for tenure-track/tenured academic appointment, i.e. it is a minimal academic requirement. That is one of the reasons why we normally do not take a single published book to indicate notability by WP:PROF. Passing usually requires 2 published books, either by 1st rate university presses or that show very good library holdings (I informally call this the "DGG" condition, as he often invokes it in AfDs). Agricola44 (talk) 22:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC).

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. The keeps seem to be based largely on testimonials. Objective analysis shows Levy is an entry-level academic with 1 book that grew out of her PhD thesis and that that book has about average library holdings according to WorldCat. Her work has 4 GS citations. This is the archetypical case of WP:TOOSOON. Aside, the article itself is full of WP:OR and the reference list is mostly web pages, YouTube vids, and publications by Levy herself. The only WP:RS is the NYT wedding announcement. Agricola44 (talk) 17:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC).
 * Delete as per nom and . My sweeps of US news, world news, Spanish-related media, did not find much to indicate coverage meeting the WP:GNG. Her book on Amazon here published in 2014 has not yet had one customer review -- I know, not an official reason, but an indication to me of a lack of interest.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kraxler (talk) 16:38, 9 July 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.