379:
large it is the rule. IT is also possible that a teacher could write a textbook, but that is much more likely to occur at the college level (as a college is probably more likely to grant a sabbatical to write a book than a public high school). I'm not sure if we have spearate guidelines for the notability of high school teachers, but if we don't we can follow WP:BIO more generally. "The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them." We can't probably make a full judgment of the notability of each of these awards received (aside from the fact that they don't have wiki links), but the run-down above actually does a good job. I'm inclined to think that about 2/3 of these awards are not too earth shaking, but the other 1/3 might be worth something. All in all, tie goes to the article.
56:, but I think that "notable award" here means an award which makes a person famous, not an award which meets Knowledge (XXG)'s general notability guidelines. (Otherwise we could for example have articles on anyone wounded in combat for the US Military since they received Purple Hearts.) The question here regarding encyclopedic notability for this subject was whether the awards and participation in debates confer notability. The consensus appears to be that it does not, since such awards are fairly common. Nsk92 has also pointed out that there is a lack of available sources to make a decent biography. I recognize that two people have objected to deletion, but the consensus appears to be against them, and the case for deletion seems solid.
442:
yet still be notable (by virtue of awards, position, recognition). For one, we only need to meat one WP:BIO criteria to establish notability. For another thing, WP:PROF is written so that notable academics who would otherwise not be included could be added by the virtue of their contribution to scholarship. It is, in my opinion, inappropriate to apply those standards to a profession where publishing research is not an expected activity. Having said this, I also understand that this guy might not meet WP:BIO. To me it falls down to a judgment call on the notability of the awards, and their verifiability.
563:(then of course, Texas is extremely populous, with a young population). I'm leaning toward Keep, because there's a definite recognition that he is one of the best teachers in the second most populous state in America, and that's something. But then again, what does one gain from the article? It won't help to explain where a particular theory comes from (as Prof. articles tend to), it's unlikely to be of assistance for doing research--will it just become a vanity/vandalism trap? That pushes me more towards delete. (realizing now I'm basically going through Dhartung's arguments again). --
424:, either, given the vast number awarded and the nebulous and oftentimes political criteria for receiving them. Can anyone point to any of this person's awards as being particularly distinguished? I would also say that this looks like a vanity page: the only other page that the page's creator contributed to was
531:
Remember, all he has to meet is this: "The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them.". Then it doesn't matter if he fails the rest of the criteria. In my mind there is a real verifiability problem for those awards (or at least, for all of them), but if that
441:
In the case that WP:PROF is meant to apply to high school teachers, I'm asking for a little common sense on the subject. If shouldn't be applied to them. It is entirely possible that a high school teacher could go their entire life without having written a textbook or contributed a scholarly work,
378:
I don't think WP:PROF is appropriate here. It is not expected that high school teachers generally contribute to the advancement of their field in a scholarly manner. there ARE some exceptions to this (Mainly in the field of education, but there actually is a journal of HS chemistry), but by and
553:
I believe, for instance, a national or state teacher of the year award is notable (and these seem to have survived AfD before), but it's hard to know what "Distinguished teacher, White House" is (how many are given? how is the award chosen? is the award covered by the national or even local
557:) might be a notable award, and the "Honorary Membership" (given five times) might also be: their newsletter does have advertisers (textbook printers), so there may be some indication of influence. He also won an award by a national biology teacher's association
494:
itself, at the moment these seem to be the only applicable guidelines that one could use here to justify notability. The NPR reference is solid, but it is certainly insufficient to establish notability. A GoogleNews (all dates) search turns up only four more
498:. The only factors to indicate real notability seem to be the awards listed. If more sources and details related to the awards are found, I may be willing to change to weak keep/keep, as one might then argue that he satisfies
210:
I'm trying to decide. Sources are not that great. He has awards, but mostly of the mass variety. He was on an NPR to debate evolution and he spoke at a state hearing on teaching it. But these were somewhat incidental. For the
463:
high school teachers normally become notable either through awards, and the question is whether these are sufficient. I think they are. In any profession, president of the State
Association is significant.
274:
254:
at this time. These are awards, but there are few sources about him, and the sheer number of state-level teacher awards would seem to obviate our making that inherently notable. In aggregate, though? --
141:
EDIT: The NPR article states he was the
President of the Texas Association of Biology Teachers - but I'm not sure if that's notable. I would AFD it unless there is a consensus that this is notable.
129:
48:. I found the discussion here to be most interesting, and the comments from Dhartung and Myke Cuthbert were very helpful though they were "neutral". I have read the quoted
496:
96:
91:
100:
83:
502:(based on criterion 6 of WP:PROF). I am somewhat sympathetic to Protonk's comments, but at the moment the choice here really is between
17:
425:
187:
326:
572:
541:
523:
474:
451:
432:
402:
388:
370:
349:
332:
289:
262:
198:
165:
150:
65:
587:
36:
87:
586:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
285:
79:
71:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
551:
the awards don't seem to add up to WP's BIO notability, but it's hard for me from outside the field, to know.
231:
The AP Special
Recognition Awards from College Board are annual, recognizing several teachers from a region.
241:, which goes to one person, that's definitely an honor. If it's a State Teacher of the Year (who are the
234:
NABT Outstanding
Biology Teacher of the Year is intriguing, but again it's "for Texas", implying 1 of 50.
218:
Being
President is an honor but not an award for merit. At the state level, I don't believe it's notable.
555:
398:
345:
181:
146:
306:
notability. Definitely not an expert in any field and not the author of any kind of significant text.
568:
558:
366:
307:
281:
161:
60:
156:
This is very confusing. Who is the nominator of this article, and do they want it deleted or not?
316:
259:
195:
242:
420:
would be, however. In any case, distinguished teaching awards don't seem to pass muster under
537:
447:
428:; the same goes another earlier contributor (both IP addresses from the same town in Texas).
384:
238:
222:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
503:
499:
483:
417:
299:
394:
341:
177:
142:
507:
487:
421:
49:
564:
519:
54:"The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them"
362:
157:
57:
511:
491:
470:
255:
191:
237:
Distinguished
Teacher by the White House is intriguing as well. If it's the same as
533:
443:
380:
137:
I see various unreferenced statements - I don't see how this individual is notable.
117:
357:
The only thing that seems to approach real notability is being a guest on NPR's
561:
515:
412:
I think the reason we don't have a WP:TEACH is because teachers generally
465:
429:
560:
but it's given yearly to 50 teachers, so that might not be enough
554:
press?). The president of Texas
Association of Biology Teachers (
580:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
228:
Life membership at state level even less notable than president.
225:
go mostly to students, but one teacher per state. 1 of 50 or so.
275:
list of
Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
361:, and he was just a guest, not the subject of the show.
124:
113:
109:
105:
340:. Resume/CV for a non-notable high school teacher.
245:
for the
National title), again, it's 1 in 50 or so.
190:) placed the AFD tag and created the discussion. --
416:notable; any who rose to the level of satisfying
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
590:). No further edits should be made to this page.
532:list is 100% true there is no reason to delete.
514:), neither of which seems to be satisfied here.
8:
302:. The awards themselves are of questionable
393:AFAIK WP:PROF applies to all academics.
273:: This debate has been included in the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
426:Robert Dennison (US Navy officer)
490:either. Apart from the general
1:
239:National Teacher of the Year
607:
573:05:52, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
542:17:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
524:03:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
475:03:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
452:18:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
433:14:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
403:13:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
389:07:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
371:18:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
350:10:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
333:03:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
290:03:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
263:09:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
199:08:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
166:06:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
151:05:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
80:Robert Dennison (biology)
72:Robert Dennison (biology)
583:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
66:09:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
486:and does not satisfy
359:Talk of the Nation
571:
328:
323:
292:
278:
63:
598:
585:
567:
482:. Does not pass
327:
321:
317:
311:
279:
269:
127:
121:
103:
61:
44:The result was
34:
606:
605:
601:
600:
599:
597:
596:
595:
594:
588:deletion review
581:
331:
322:
319:
309:
123:
94:
78:
75:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
604:
602:
593:
592:
576:
575:
544:
526:
510:(and possibly
477:
457:
456:
455:
454:
436:
435:
407:
406:
405:
373:
352:
335:
318:
314:
293:
282:David Eppstein
266:
265:
248:
247:
246:
235:
232:
229:
226:
223:Siemens Awards
219:
213:
212:
204:
203:
202:
201:
169:
168:
134:
133:
74:
69:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
603:
591:
589:
584:
578:
577:
574:
570:
566:
565:Myke Cuthbert
562:
559:
556:
552:
548:
545:
543:
539:
535:
530:
527:
525:
521:
517:
513:
509:
505:
501:
497:
493:
489:
485:
481:
478:
476:
472:
468:
467:
462:
459:
458:
453:
449:
445:
440:
439:
438:
437:
434:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
408:
404:
400:
396:
392:
391:
390:
386:
382:
377:
374:
372:
368:
364:
360:
356:
353:
351:
347:
343:
339:
336:
334:
329:
324:
313:
312:
305:
301:
297:
294:
291:
287:
283:
276:
272:
268:
267:
264:
261:
257:
253:
249:
244:
240:
236:
233:
230:
227:
224:
220:
217:
216:
215:
214:
209:
206:
205:
200:
197:
193:
189:
186:
183:
179:
176:
173:
172:
171:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
154:
153:
152:
148:
144:
139:
138:
131:
126:
119:
115:
111:
107:
102:
98:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
76:
73:
70:
68:
67:
64:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
582:
579:
550:
546:
528:
479:
464:
460:
413:
409:
375:
358:
354:
337:
308:
303:
295:
270:
251:
250:So I remain
207:
184:
174:
140:
136:
135:
53:
45:
43:
31:
28:
480:Weak Delete
395:WhisperToMe
342:KleenupKrew
243:competitors
178:WhisperToMe
143:WhisperToMe
52:criterion
376:Weak Keep
363:Beeblbrox
158:Beeblbrox
58:Sjakkalle
495:mentions
310:Wisdom89
298:- Fails
256:Dhartung
192:Dhartung
188:contribs
130:View log
62:(Check!)
547:Neutral
534:Protonk
529:Comment
504:WP:PROF
500:WP:PROF
484:WP:PROF
444:Protonk
418:WP:PROF
381:Protonk
304:overall
300:WP:PROF
252:neutral
211:awards:
208:Comment
175:Comment
97:protect
92:history
569:(talk)
508:WP:BIO
488:WP:BIO
422:WP:BIO
414:aren't
410:Delete
355:Delete
338:Delete
296:Delete
125:delete
101:delete
50:WP:BIO
46:delete
516:Nsk92
128:) – (
118:views
110:watch
106:links
16:<
538:talk
520:talk
512:WP:N
506:and
492:WP:N
471:talk
461:Keep
448:talk
399:talk
385:talk
367:talk
346:talk
286:talk
271:Note
260:Talk
221:The
196:Talk
182:talk
162:talk
147:talk
114:logs
88:talk
84:edit
549:--
466:DGG
430:RJC
277:.
540:)
522:)
473:)
450:)
401:)
387:)
369:)
348:)
325:/
288:)
258:|
194:|
164:)
149:)
116:|
112:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
536:(
518:(
469:(
446:(
397:(
383:(
365:(
344:(
330:)
320:T
315:(
284:(
280:—
185:·
180:(
160:(
145:(
132:)
122:(
120:)
82:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.