Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas A. Moore


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 11:41, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Thomas A. Moore

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Academic without a significant publication record or major awards. While he has written two textbooks, notability of them is unclear with only one review. In any case, even if the book is notable the author does not have to be. Page was moved to draft following NPR; editor rejected draftification and moved back to main without attempting to prove notability. Hence time for AfD. Ldm1954 (talk) 07:29, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 07:29, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Science,  and California.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  10:42, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. The subject holds a named chair at Pomona College, but I am unconvinced that Pomona is a "major institution of higher education and research" in the sense of WP:NPROF C5.  It is difficult to disambiguate this Thomas Moore from the many others of the same name for citations. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 13:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I forgot to add that point to the nomination, I should have. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The specific criteria notes at NPROF state that Major institutions, for these purposes, are those that have a reputation for excellence or selectivity. Pomona is one of the most selective higher education institutions in the U.S., so it unambiguously meets that standard.  Sdkb  talk 14:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ultimately, NPROF is for impact in the larger field. The Pomona press release  certainly makes it sound like this endowed chair is essentially a high-powered university-wide teaching award.  So I am unconvinced by NPROF C5.  I will think about the NAUTHOR case you make below. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 15:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The press release focuses on teaching because Pomona is a liberal arts college and liberal arts colleges emphasize teaching over research. But authoring a popular textbook is certainly impact on the field (academia's bias toward research over pedagogy notwithstanding).
 * In any case, the NPROF C5 discussion is now moot given that the additional sources XOR'easter has found (two reviews of his other book in peer-reviewed academic journals, plus a fourth academic source with SIGCOV of Six Ideas) make the NAUTHOR case pretty unimpeachable.  Sdkb  talk 18:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. There are paths to notability both under WP:NPROF #5 and under WP:NAUTHOR #3, either one of which would be sufficient. For NPROF, he holds an endowed chair indicating a significant level of academic achievement, having previously been a full-tenured professor. For NAUTHOR — The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews — Moore is the author of Six Ideas that Shaped Physics, which has been the subject of multiple reviews in peer-reviewed academic journals.  Contrary to the nominator's assertion that I rejected draftification without attempting to prove notability, I communicated with them about NPROF and then more recently added the three reviews, which they may have missed in stating that there is only one review. Their comment that these would count only toward notability of the book and not Moore is a misunderstanding of NAUTHOR, per a plain reading of the guideline text.  Sdkb   talk 15:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, reviews of a book can count towards the notability of an author (what else should an author be known for, other than their books? their stroganoff recipe?). However, authors are generally not seen as notable unless there are multiple reviews of multiple books apiece. An author with only one book is typically seen as a person known for only one thing, in which case it makes more sense to write an article about the book instead. There are exceptions, of course. Someone who writes a book that becomes one of the standard texts used in nearly every university course on a topic would be argued to meet WP:PROF, even if none of their other accomplishments stand out. Jackson would be notable just for writing Jackson. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Having done a literature search for substantial, reliably-published reviews of his textbooks, I believe that WP:AUTHOR is met. (In addition to the references I added, there is also, which I wasn't quite sure how to incorporate; it's more about the work that led up to the Six Ideas book than the book itself.) I don't think that Moore is at the level where the book is known by his last name, which roughly speaking is the kind of status that would meet WP:PROF, and I have no opinion about the WP:PROF case, but neither of those is necessary here. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep, now the case has changed from WP:PROF to WP:AUTHOR I have no problem with retaining the page, given the sources that XOR&#39;easter found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldm1954 (talk • contribs)
 * Keep. WP:NAUTHOR case now looks reasonably solid, with two works that got multiple reviews. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 19:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: His "Six Ideas" textbook would make him notable with it used to teach an introduction to physics. Oaktree b (talk) 00:26, 10 July 2024 (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.