641:, prolific in terms of publication output, but the guidelines look for third-party attention, not just a high publication count. Comments above implying that Callahan should get a free pass because of 'the state of "liberal biases" within academia these days' are not grounded in policy and should be ignored by the closing administrator.
353:. Entries under section headers "Notes" and "External links" are more than sufficient to ensure subject's notability. If the bar were to be placed so high that even such a lengthy career in economics and academia is insufficient for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG), then our enumeration of 1551 entries at
378:
I count his two books, his staff listing (none independent), and two book reviews mentioned in the nom, published from the same institute that published his books. External links are all listings of his own blog posts. More than sufficient?—not even close...
164:
223:, as its reviews occupy most of the author's article, but again, low library holdings for the title, and the book was not even listed in Book Review Index or Digest, so the other reviews are niche, minor, or unreliable. Alas.
239:
303:
provides a listing of scholarly articles, all reliable and independent. Also, given the state of "liberal biases" within academia these days, it is not surprising that he's not mainstream. (Just like
476:
Yes, the "citation metrics" guidance does not support David
Eppstein's comment. Also, not being in the top 10% (or 25%) REPEC listing is a poor argument. By that logic WP would only have
158:
117:
277:
258:
413:, and no other argument for notability has been adduced. We need academic impact, not just the existence of publications, for notability, and I don't see it here. —
219:, he is not a full faculty member, and has fairly low Google Scholar citations and trivial library holdings for his field. Considered redirecting to an article on
90:
85:
124:
94:
77:
307:
was not the mainstream cause of stomach ulcers until 1982.) Alas (indeed) upcoming travel prevents me from working on the article. (ARROO!) –
179:
146:
450:
17:
435:, I see that "7.6" is an acceptable h-index number for full professors in economics. Callahan (if I read this right) has a "9". –
375:
140:
645:
631:
604:
572:
537:
524:
506:
493:
471:
444:
422:
387:
366:
341:
316:
288:
269:
250:
231:
136:
59:
613:
582:
481:
354:
665:
40:
186:
81:
418:
73:
65:
326:
362:
529:
Saying that the above arguments were not convincing and that no other sources are forthcoming is not "ATA"
152:
661:
36:
568:
520:
489:
440:
312:
52:. Consensus here is that, regardless of his publication history, third-party coverage is lacking. --
414:
304:
172:
330:
358:
56:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
660:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
560:
410:
216:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
627:
512:
196:
564:
516:
485:
436:
308:
406:
and his failure to appear on REPEC's list of the top 25% of economists in his home state
404:
210:
204:
200:
642:
598:
531:
500:
465:
381:
335:
282:
263:
244:
225:
407:
460:
53:
477:
111:
623:
593:
456:
300:
432:
400:
333:
in secondary sources or collections show the impact of his work.
654:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
616:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
585:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
240:
list of
Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
453:
about the issues with using h-index without added context.
511:
Without more his argument (like
Xxanthippe's below) is
451:
Knowledge (XXG):Notability (academics)#Citation metrics
107:
103:
99:
171:
433:
H-index#Results_across_disciplines_and_career_levels
622:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
591:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
185:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
668:). No further edits should be made to this page.
329:of the subject (himself). The question is what
278:list of Economics-related deletion discussions
8:
498:Metrics weren't his sole rationale, though.
276:Note: This debate has been included in the
259:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
257:Note: This debate has been included in the
238:Note: This debate has been included in the
275:
256:
237:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
563:not passed. Can't find much else.
24:
217:the scholar notability guideline
325:Articles that he wrote are not
1:
573:05:47, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
423:20:59, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
388:18:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
367:17:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
342:16:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
317:16:12, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
289:05:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
270:05:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
251:05:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
232:05:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
482:Category:American_economists
409:argue that he does not pass
355:Category:American economists
478:1,010 US economist articles
685:
646:01:12, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
632:04:44, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
357:would be very slim indeed.
195:American academic without
60:03:32, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
605:04:37, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
538:06:53, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
525:05:43, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
507:05:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
494:05:26, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
484:gives us about 2,000. –
472:05:09, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
445:04:53, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
221:Economics For Real People
74:Gene Callahan (economist)
66:Gene Callahan (economist)
657:Please do not modify it.
461:also considered them low
399:. Both his single-digit
32:Please do not modify it.
331:significant coverage
197:significant coverage
305:Helicobacter pylori
205:independent sources
403:on Google scholar
634:
607:
365:
291:
272:
253:
214:
676:
659:
621:
619:
617:
601:
596:
590:
588:
586:
536:
534:
505:
503:
470:
468:
459:
386:
384:
363:(talk)(contribs)
361:
340:
338:
287:
285:
268:
266:
249:
247:
230:
228:
208:
190:
189:
175:
127:
115:
97:
34:
684:
683:
679:
678:
677:
675:
674:
673:
672:
666:deletion review
655:
635:
612:
610:
608:
599:
594:
581:
579:
532:
530:
501:
499:
466:
464:
454:
382:
380:
336:
334:
283:
281:
264:
262:
245:
243:
226:
224:
132:
123:
88:
72:
69:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
682:
680:
671:
670:
650:
649:
620:
609:
589:
578:
577:
576:
553:
552:
551:
550:
549:
548:
547:
546:
545:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
426:
425:
415:David Eppstein
393:
392:
391:
390:
370:
369:
359:—Roman Spinner
347:
346:
345:
344:
320:
319:
293:
292:
273:
254:
193:
192:
129:
68:
63:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
681:
669:
667:
663:
658:
652:
651:
647:
644:
640:
637:
636:
633:
629:
625:
618:
615:
606:
603:
602:
597:
587:
584:
574:
570:
566:
562:
558:
555:
554:
539:
535:
528:
527:
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
509:
508:
504:
497:
496:
495:
491:
487:
483:
479:
475:
474:
473:
469:
462:
458:
452:
448:
447:
446:
442:
438:
434:
430:
429:
428:
427:
424:
420:
416:
412:
408:
405:
402:
398:
395:
394:
389:
385:
377:
374:
373:
372:
371:
368:
364:
360:
356:
352:
349:
348:
343:
339:
332:
328:
324:
323:
322:
321:
318:
314:
310:
306:
302:
298:
295:
294:
290:
286:
279:
274:
271:
267:
260:
255:
252:
248:
241:
236:
235:
234:
233:
229:
222:
218:
212:
206:
202:
198:
188:
184:
181:
178:
174:
170:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
138:
135:
134:Find sources:
130:
126:
122:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
656:
653:
638:
611:
592:
580:
556:
396:
350:
296:
220:
199:in multiple
194:
182:
176:
168:
161:
155:
149:
143:
133:
120:
49:
47:
31:
28:
431:Looking at
327:independent
159:free images
565:Xxanthippe
411:WP:PROF#C1
662:talk page
643:Lankiveil
37:talk page
664:or in a
614:Relisted
583:Relisted
201:reliable
118:View log
54:RoySmith
39:or in a
561:WP:Prof
517:S. Rich
486:S. Rich
437:S. Rich
401:h-index
309:S. Rich
215:As for
165:WP refs
153:scholar
91:protect
86:history
639:Delete
624:Kurykh
557:Delete
513:WP:ATA
480:. But
397:Delete
137:Google
95:delete
57:(talk)
50:delete
515:. –
301:REPEC
180:JSTOR
141:books
125:Stats
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
628:talk
569:talk
533:czar
521:talk
502:czar
490:talk
467:czar
449:See
441:talk
419:talk
383:czar
351:Keep
337:czar
313:talk
297:Keep
284:czar
265:czar
246:czar
227:czar
173:FENS
147:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
600:947
457:DGG
376:???
187:TWL
116:– (
630:)
571:)
559:.
523:)
492:)
463:.
443:)
421:)
315:)
299:–
280:.
261:.
242:.
207:.
203:,
167:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
648:.
626:(
595:J
575:.
567:(
519:(
488:(
455:@
439:(
417:(
311:(
213:)
211:?
209:(
191:)
183:·
177:·
169:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
139:(
131:(
128:)
121:·
114:)
76:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.