Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Swanson (second nomination)

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 and move to Timothy Swanson. This is a non-admin closure. Black Falcon ^(Talk) 07:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Swanson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

non notable college professor. --Адам12901 ^T/_C 20:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 02:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The article fails to elucidate why Swanson is more notable than your average professor. YechielMan 02:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep sure it does, the average professor does not come anywhere near the status of the holder of a named chair at an an internationally famous research university such as University College,London. (and UK named chairs are fewer and even more prestigious than the US ones.). If there's 5000 UK university teachers of economics (a guess) this would put him in the top 1%. There are undoubtedly major publications to add, so the article is still a stub, but with a position like that the notability is certain and the publications will certainly be there. That's why people get such positions. DGG 05:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WjBscribe 00:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I think the nomination here comes from a confusion between the different meanings of "Professor" in British & American English. In the UK, Professor is the highest rung on the academic ladder, and a Professorship at the largest university in the country is definitely N — iridescenti (talk to me!) 00:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. I am convinced by his title that he could be notable, but the article is in an embarrassingly stubby state and has not been improved over the course of the AfD. For someone to have reached this point, it seems very likely that a lot more could be said about him. —David Eppstein 00:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Ditto others. --Remi 01:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Any University Professor holding the chair of a department at a prestigious University is notable. Jazznutuva 11:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. "Professor Swanson currently holds the Chair in Law & Economics at University College London". That's notable. The article should list some or all of his publications and it doesn't, but I think you can assume he didn't get a job as prestigious as that without any. BTLizard 11:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable in his field, holding a Chair at UCL implies that. I've added some publications but if anyone has access to a decent academic database I'm sure they'll find more. Madmedea 14:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Definitely notable. mako (talk•contribs) 17:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per BTLizard. matt91486 20:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• comment JStor, doing a search of 75 journals (targeted search of Law, Economics, Finance, Statistical research, Population studies and African-American Studies) has no hits for this guy, though JStor has a 2-year lag in availibility, you'd expect a chair to have published more widely than simply the last 2 years in his field(s) of specialty. He's mentioned on Lexis Legal Research only in the abstract of a symposium actually written by Daniel H. Cole in that he'll be presenting a paper on the conservation of biological resorces in 'legal regimes'. For someone who's supposedly a notable professor and chair, his publications in reputable journals (those included in Lexis/Nexis and JStor) seem to be pretty thin. On the other hand symposium inclusion and citation in other works may speak to notability. I admit I was hoping for a 'slam dunk' keep case when I went on JStor and Lexis, to compare, a search for the chair of my own department at University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee shows 5 'highly relevant' hits on JStor, 7 on Lexis/Nexis and 313 on Google Scholar (plus 125 more without his middle initial).Wintermut3 22:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and comment: hits go up substantially if you search for "Timothy Swanson" instead of "Tim Swanson." A book of his was reviewed in The Economic Journal, Vol. 111, No. 475, and called "important" (the review seems more interested in listing the contents than assessing their impact pro or con). BTW - UCL Economics department does seem to use Professor in the American sense, but it's still more notable than average. --Myke Cuthbert 23:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• confirmation Indeed searching for his full name gives far more hits on both JStor and Lexis/Nexis. I kinda dropped the ball there, since most people do publish under their full names. In light of that, he does appear to be substantially notable for his publications. Wintermut3 01:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good argument for for moving this page from Tim to Timothy Swanson once the AfD is over, since that's what he has chosen to publish under and its his publications that make him notable. --Myke Cuthbert 02:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

keep and move Good point Mscuthbert. On further review of publications I can definately say there are enough hits on google scholar and in publication databases that are relevant (IE pertaining to THIS Timothy Swanson) to establish him as a notable professor above and beyond being a named academic chair at a notable university, which in and of itself conveys notability. All that added together makes me confident enough to lodge a firm 'keep' vote, if the page is moved to the name that he publishes under. Wintermut3 06:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - notable academic. Metamagician3000 23:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.