Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Everitt

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. Article has been expanded since nomination. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃 _{(ICE-T • ICE CUBE)} 13:30, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Everitt

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is completely empty. 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 13:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, History, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak delete~~~~. Normally an empty article would be up for speedy delete per WP:A3, but this is only empty due to vandalism. However, even before vandalism it was just one sentence, flirting with WP:NOTDIRECTORY.~~ Sakkura (talk) 16:10, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Now has actual content (notability wasn't an issue). Sakkura (talk) 17:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Fellow of the British Academy is a pass of WP:PROF#C3 and it comes with a published 18-page biography of giving us plenty of material with which to expand the article. Quick searches of Google Scholar and JSTOR show huge numbers of reviews of his books (the JSTOR search for his name in a review came back with 150 hits), showing also a pass of WP:AUTHOR and many more sources to use to expand our article with content about those books. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:39, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is high praise for the subject from the British Academy, the Guardian, and the University of Leicester: (1) (2), (3). This could be a decent sized article based on those sources alone. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 16:59, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - clearly - GizzyCatBella🍁 03:23, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I stand corrected 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 19:23, 18 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]
Keep Keep for the reasons stated above however, I think that I need to point out that, currently, except for the commas I just added, this article is an exact duplicate of a page on everybodywiki named Alan Everitt, right down to the citations. I would post a link but, Wikipedia has blacklisted that site and I don't think we need to ask for an exception for this. I found that page with a simple google search. Of course when dealing with biographical facts, it's pretty much impossible to avoid duplication but . . . Delta30061972 (talk) 00:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC) Edit - The internet is replete with duplications of Wikipedia articles. I have no idea which came first in this case or if it is the same author putting his/her work in multiple places. Simply pointing this out.[reply]
- Usually, the page will exist on Wikipedia first and reappear on facsimiles like Everipedia (or however it is called now) within a month or so. The text will be almost identical to whenever the last crawl was. NiklausGerard (talk) 02:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  Thanks, I'm new here. I figured that might be the case. Delta30061972 (talk) 02:21, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - You’re welcome, thanks for weighing in! Keep up the good work. NiklausGerard (talk) 03:07, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With three highly-credible sources delving in-depth, subject meets WP:GNG. NiklausGerard (talk) 02:00, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, significantly improved since nomination. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:43, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly meets WP:PROF #5 as holder of a named chair at a major university. Plus clear consensus that obituaries in The Times and The Guardian are sufficient to establish notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely keep -- He held named chair as head of the leading department in English Local History. Clearly notable, even if the present article is somewhat slender in it coverage. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:59, 20 April 2022 (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.