Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/James R. Barker - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

281:. Attempts to change this policy should be made on the talk page of that article, not here. Whatever the outcome of this AfD debate, the nominator seems to have done an inadequate job. He finds no references, whereas the first person to wander by and click a link finds 1000 plus (a few citations indeed!). 427:
at Waikato lists him as the editor for MCQ (that's how I found out about it) so I'm quite sure they're the same. I tried searching Dalhousie for his name but found very little there. I don't know why MCQ lists his affiliation as Dalhousie; maybe it's a mistake, or maybe he was there at some point and
303:
Because you don't like the way that the nominator handled this it does not follow that they are trying to change policy, and I wonder if you really thought that was the case. If you have found 2000 reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject (or even one) then it will be very helpful if
257:
Nothing whatsoever to suggest he is any more than a very ordinary run-of-the-mill academic. The fact that a few citations can be located proves nothing: all academics write papers, and papers get cited by other academics, even if they are of minor significance. I have found no evidence that Barker
308:
that was done was clicking on a link: if so that is not enough. You need to sort the wheat from the chaff, e.g. the mentions of this James Barker from other James Barkers, the passing mentions from the significant coverage, the multiple mirrors of an original article from those originals, the
408:. The editor of the journal is affiliated with Dalhousie university whereas the subject of this nomination appears to be from New Zealand. Are they the same? If they are different this will reflect on citations. The article is poorly written and needs improvement at least. 304:
you can give us links to some of them: simply stating that they exist is not helpful. I have spent a considerable amount of time searching, and have not found them. Also I wonder whether "the first person to wander by and click a link" implies that
309:
reliable sources from the unreliable ones, etc. You may of course have done this, but it is not clear from the above comment that you have. If you have then please, as I have suggested above, give us links to the good sources you have found.
239:. J R Barker is a not uncommon name but on GS I find cites in management science of 1087, 114, 89, 43... which is a good start. Could the nominator comment if these are for the correct person? If so there are plenty of references. 258:
has received particularly significant attention, and the article does not even suggest that he has. Part of the original text of the article was written in the first person. The article is essentially a very short C.V. or resume.
160: 215: 357: 115: 154: 120: 88: 83: 92: 17: 75: 175: 142: 331: 495: 36: 136: 494:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
433: 396: 368: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
480: 460: 437: 417: 400: 372: 347: 318: 290: 267: 248: 230: 204: 132: 57: 343: 314: 263: 79: 389: 192: 182: 456: 413: 286: 244: 226: 424: 429: 392: 364: 168: 339: 310: 259: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
448: 382: 335: 278: 148: 53: 452: 409: 282: 240: 222: 71: 63: 277:. WP policy regarding notability of academics, researchers and scholars is determined by 476: 200: 109: 338:
criterion 1. I don't understand how these can be described as "a few" citations.
49: 469:
as editor of major journal. The material needs to be added to the article.
471: 196: 488:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
216:
list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
105: 101: 97: 167: 332:
a paper that has attracted over a thousand citations
181: 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 498:). No further edits should be made to this page. 358:list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions 385:#1, but also I think he passes #8 as editor of 8: 447:. I think that settles the matter. Passes 352: 210: 356:: This debate has been included in the 214:: This debate has been included in the 381:. Per Phil Bridger he appears to pass 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 387:Management Communication Quarterly 24: 330:. Any academic who has written 195:. Unreferenced. Disputed prod. 1: 515: 348:20:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 319:12:43, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 291:01:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 268:10:03, 30 March 2010 (UTC) 249:08:23, 30 March 2010 (UTC) 231:08:16, 30 March 2010 (UTC) 205:06:58, 30 March 2010 (UTC) 481:17:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 461:04:29, 3 April 2010 (UTC) 438:03:32, 3 April 2010 (UTC) 418:02:15, 3 April 2010 (UTC) 401:22:28, 2 April 2010 (UTC) 373:22:25, 2 April 2010 (UTC) 58:18:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 491:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 334:pretty clearly passes 44:The result was 375: 361: 233: 219: 506: 493: 362: 220: 191:Appears to fail 186: 185: 171: 123: 113: 95: 34: 514: 513: 509: 508: 507: 505: 504: 503: 502: 496:deletion review 489: 128: 119: 86: 72:James R. Barker 70: 67: 64:James R. Barker 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 512: 510: 501: 500: 484: 483: 464: 442: 441: 440: 430:David Eppstein 403: 393:David Eppstein 376: 365:David Eppstein 350: 324: 323: 322: 321: 295: 294: 271: 270: 252: 234: 189: 188: 125: 121:AfD statistics 66: 61: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 511: 499: 497: 492: 486: 485: 482: 478: 474: 473: 468: 465: 462: 458: 454: 450: 446: 443: 439: 435: 431: 426: 425:staff profile 422: 421: 419: 415: 411: 407: 404: 402: 398: 394: 390: 388: 384: 380: 377: 374: 370: 366: 359: 355: 351: 349: 345: 341: 337: 333: 329: 326: 325: 320: 316: 312: 307: 302: 299: 298: 297: 296: 292: 288: 284: 280: 276: 273: 272: 269: 265: 261: 256: 253: 250: 246: 242: 238: 235: 232: 228: 224: 217: 213: 209: 208: 207: 206: 202: 198: 194: 184: 180: 177: 174: 170: 166: 162: 159: 156: 153: 150: 147: 144: 141: 138: 134: 131: 130:Find sources: 126: 122: 117: 111: 107: 103: 99: 94: 90: 85: 81: 77: 73: 69: 68: 65: 62: 60: 59: 55: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 490: 487: 470: 466: 444: 405: 386: 378: 353: 340:Phil Bridger 327: 311:JamesBWatson 305: 300: 274: 260:JamesBWatson 254: 236: 211: 190: 178: 172: 164: 157: 151: 145: 139: 129: 45: 43: 31: 28: 451:#1 and #8. 193:WP:ACADEMIC 155:free images 453:Xxanthippe 410:Xxanthippe 283:Xxanthippe 241:Xxanthippe 223:Xxanthippe 423:Barker's 428:moved? — 406:Question 116:View log 449:WP:Prof 383:WP:PROF 336:WP:PROF 301:Comment 279:WP:Prof 275:Comment 237:Comment 161:WP refs 149:scholar 89:protect 84:history 255:Delete 133:Google 93:delete 50:JohnCD 477:talk 467:Keep' 176:JSTOR 137:books 110:views 102:watch 98:links 16:< 457:talk 445:Keep 434:talk 414:talk 397:talk 379:Keep 369:talk 354:Note 344:talk 328:Keep 315:talk 287:talk 264:talk 245:talk 227:talk 212:Note 201:talk 169:FENS 143:news 106:logs 80:talk 76:edit 54:talk 46:keep 472:DGG 391:. — 306:all 197:noq 183:TWL 118:• 114:– ( 479:) 459:) 436:) 420:. 416:) 399:) 371:) 360:. 346:) 317:) 289:) 266:) 247:) 229:) 218:. 203:) 163:) 108:| 104:| 100:| 96:| 91:| 87:| 82:| 78:| 56:) 48:. 475:( 463:. 455:( 432:( 412:( 395:( 367:( 363:— 342:( 313:( 293:. 285:( 262:( 251:. 243:( 225:( 221:— 199:( 187:) 179:· 173:· 165:· 158:· 152:· 146:· 140:· 135:( 127:( 124:) 112:) 74:( 52:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
JohnCD
talk
18:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
James R. Barker
James R. Barker
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
AfD statistics
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL
WP:ACADEMIC
noq
talk

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.