Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Ricardo Duchesne

1482:

a field we don't cover well (i.e. those people may be notable) and academia in general is an area we still have limited coverage. And there's also risk of a self fulfilling prophecy if we keep deleting all the articles. (Although I hope it's recognised this also works in the reverse. If the claim is made he's been cited or debated most of the leading scholars and when we look at these leading scholars, the only evidence we have that they're leading scholars is that they've debated the other leading scholars, we end up with the same problem.) But combined with the low number of times he's been cited and lack of evidence of meeting other areas of the academics notability guidelines it doesn't seem to be compelling. If World History is really such an obscure field then perhaps there would simply be no sources. It's worth remembering that notability is not so much to do with significance but sourcing. The subject specific guidelines like Notability (academics) usually primarily refer to significance based on the assumption people with that much significance will have sources but it seems questionable if that will apply if we have to relax the criteria so much for what it seems to be claimed is an obscure field.

206:

prestigious scholarly societies. 4) This person clearly has not made any impact upon higher education. 5) The subject does not hold any distinguished titles or academic positions. 6) This subject has not held a "a major highest-level elected or appointed academic post" at any universty. 7) The subject clearly has not had any impact, let alone a substantial impact, outside of academia. 8) There is no evidence that the subject has been the editor of any journal. Google Scholar, while not a flawless citation index, shows that Duchesne's most cited work has only been cited 12 times. There are graduate students who have been cited more times than that. In addition, his "main work" was only published this year and has not been cited by anyone. Also, there is good reason to think the subject created this page himself. How could anyone possibly know that he received an award for his dissertation? There is no evidence that the subject meets the criteria of scholarly notability. Unless that evidence is produced, I therefore propose that it be deleted.

3567:

libraries that do not subscribe to the series purchased it separately. (check the holdings for prev. vols in worldcat). The normal expected worldcat holdings for a book of this sort 2 years after publication would be about 100. Over 250, might indicate some degree of particular notability. (It would take a long essay to document this, but these are my estimates.) However, it will receive reviews--all serious academic books do. And, oddly, Knowledge (XXG) accepts that as meeting WP:N for books. The only reason we don't have the consequent 25,000 articles on them a year is that people here are mostly not particularly interested, and when there is strong defense of an article for a writer like this one , it usually indicates either some special controversial topic of unusual concern here, or a fanclub of some sort. Such are the inevitable vagaries of user-generated content, and I suppose we have to accept that. This is not a place for objective evaluations of academic book or their authors.

970:, given that Throughout his editing career, his edits have consisted mostly of trying to downgrade the achievements of nonwestern civilizations, like Chinese, Arab, Indian, persian, and africans, while glorifying a eurocentric point of view. If his ire was only directed against a single civilization, such as China, he could reasonably claim to be against sinocentrism. but no, his edits consists of belittling all non western civilizations, which he has also done under the account name of Gun Powder Ma at allempires.com. His edits also consists of glorifying individuals against multicultaralism and Islam like Thilo Sarrazin , and he displayed the same sentiment and thought as Ricardo Duchesne through his edits on wikipedia and on multiple forums which leads me to believe that his only purpose in creating this article is promoting Mr. Duchesne's views. 2391:. I have been keeping an eye on this discussion since the beginning, and it is a very disturbing mess. It is quite clear that BlueonGray made a bad faith nomination and it is quite clear that Gun Powder Ma is boostering up the reputation of Duchesne. Both clearly have a conflict of interest and their massive contribution to this discussion has been, in both cases, entirely negative. We should let this rest of a while and then it should be renominated, but only if both BlueonGray and Gun Powder Ma agree to not contribute to the discussion or are blocked from so doing. My view of the article - I think it was probably written too early before notability becomes clear. Letting it rest for a while may allow some indications of notability to appear or not, with both alternatives clarifying the issue. -- 2700:: If a work receives wide coverage, then an article about the work might be notable, but being notable for a work is not enough for an independent article. There is not enough independent coverage in the RS for an article on the author, but there might be for the book. I think the keep !voters are missing this very important point. Furthermore, his book is not a peer-reviewed book, so citations in academia are irrelevant. A look at the citations shows he is not being cited as an authority, but mostly to question him: 1637:: One basic piece of logic: biographical entries for scholars should be evaluated according to independent standards of scholarly excellence and noteworthiness, not vice versa. If scholarly noteworthiness were set according to the accomplishments of Ricardo Duchesne, then every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a few publications and a handful of citations would automatically be entitled to a biographical entry. That would be preposterous. The point of these entries is to highlight 3315:. I was monitoring the Duchesne article on this basis, not becaues I was looking for GPM's disuptes with other users. Again, if I held a grudge against GPM, I would have inserted myself into multiple disputes GPM was in, anyone can pull up a list of Afd's GPM has been involved in while I was editing wiki, and I was not involved in any until now. I am aware of his involvement in an Afd on ethnic macedonians in Greece, and there are probably more which I am not aware of. 3234:- A public intellectual with a fairly high profile. All the kerfluffle above to me indicates just what we're trying to demonstrate here: that this is an individual that Knowledge (XXG) users will WANT to know about, whether one agrees with him or disagrees with him or just bumps into the name out in cyberspace. There's a big enough mass of commentary out there, pro, con, and neutral to indicate to me that this is indeed a public figure worthy of encyclopedic biography. 48:. It is clearly established below that the community, at large, does not find that Duchesne meets any of our notability guidelines, due largely to a lack of sources written about him and a lack of citations of his academic work. The procedural keep opinions below, while given in good faith, are clearly not enough to overbalance the rest of the comments in favor of deletion, regardless of whether or not this nomination was made in good faith. 2789:

GNG, we need to look at the citations: if two or more of them are published in Reliable sources, and have substantial discussion of his work, it meets the GNG. For those who think meeting the GNG over-rides anything, there need be no further necessary discussion. (I am, as you may guess,not one of them. WP:PROF is an area where GMNG often understates notability ; WP:AUTHOR is one where it grossly overstates it.).

3657:. "Duchesne's book will have a major impact in the field even though it takes some more weeks before the first reviews arrive." Contrary to policy. Knowledge (XXG) does not have a crystal ball. Renominate the BLP when (if) notability is achieved. Presently sources are not sufficient for notability. Too early. If the subject really were notable his supporters would not have to argue so loud and so long. 3124:: I thought you knew the field when the filed the Afd, so why do you ask? I hope you don't expect me to explain the scholarly merits of the individual scholars. Wong and Goldstone are leading figures of the California school which is in the opposite camp than Duchesne and they publish internationally in the Cambridge and Princeton University Press. They are all part of the debate in the field. 2764:, which consists of no less than 31 chapters, is provided for everyone to see. (Notice that it includes Patrick Manning, whom Duchesne "debated" in some online forum.) Okay, now two things are immediately obvious. First, Duchesne is conspicuously missing this volume. If he's such an important scholar, one wonders why he wasn't included. Second, going by Gun Powder's own bibliography above, not 2510:, you are pretty assertive in telling us how we should evaluate the notability of articles here. The citation of the unrelated Tilly unfortunately removes all doubts that you don't even know who Duchesne is, what his work is and why he is an important scholar. All you have is the grudge against Duchesne because he published an article about the "racism industry" in Canada in some newspaper 4121:

procedural keep would be better as even a new Afd would not remove the birth mark of being a bad faith nomination which all people here fully well know it has been. There should be some time in between, not in the least to allow sufficient reception of his book, which, I presume, will anyway show that he is actively enough debated in his field to make all of this discussion obsolete.

4095: 4020:

here, which is the inability of editors to behave with decorum. As such, I strongly oppose it: let the discussion flow, and let the chips fall where they might fall. I trust the admins to make the hard choices and evaluate the discussion on its merits and ignore and pay attention to the irrelevant and relevant parts of the discussion .--

1023:(without duplications) by many of the most notable scholars in the field, including entire peer-reviewed articles by some of these leading figures exclusively devoted to Duchesne's theories. The question is is it necessary to cite them one by one here for people who are not that familiar with this field? I could do that, if need arises. 2808:

do, I cannot contact because of canvassing. What do you exactly mean with "if two or more of them are published in Reliable sources, and have substantial discussion of his work, it meets the GNG"? This criteria has been met many times over by Duchesne, he has several works which were cited in at least two RS sources. Regards

2658:. His 2011 book on multiculturalism (and his only one on any topic) is nothing special and as yet un-reviewed it seems. No GNG-type coverage was presented for this scholar either, and given that the article is fairly elaborate including which classes he took and with whom, I suspect all available sources have been exhausted. 2169:. It is also clear that BoG has an undisclosed COI on this subject - see the COIN. All the debate here has been far too polarised by this; I'd like to see this closed as a procedural keep, without prejudice to revisiting the issue in a month or two if anyone still wishes too, if the undisclosed COI can be resolved 907:, two AfDs and anonymous vandalism by a IP from Toronto. Nice acting on your part. You registering only here to mislead other users in his so-called negligibilty. I challenge you to list all citations you know and I'll provide the rest. So please cite the allegedly "12" citations, I'll add up the rest. Thanks 2590: 4019:

of deletion discussions, with the aim of disrupting the discussion to give the impression of no consensus? Specially when they are not going their way? This solution, while in good faith and certainly seeking to move forward, has a negative unintended consequence. We cannot go around the real problem

3252:

And we still have thousands of intellectuals at hundreds of universities with no wikipedia pages. the article on Ricardo, as currently written, looks like a glowering report designed to promote the individual, there is no criticism section, and it looks designed to promote Duchesne's views. There are

2807:

First sensible post I have read here and which displays some actual understanding of the topic. Yes, he has been cited by most authorities in the field. But the whole discussion here is heavily tilted towards counting socks, because no-one has an idea about what the field is. Unfortunately, those who

2753:

I realize the case for keeping this article has all but collapsed, but I want to settle one claim that has been repeated above ad nauseum: the claim that "Duchesne has been cited by most authorities" in the field of World History. The sheer audacity of this claim would be bad enough if it weren't for

1500:

and does not help us establishing the notability of the authors independently. That is why I am a bit frustrated at how the discussion goes. I know the field quite good, and I know that nearly all scholars have debated him but how can I demonstrate this if people don't know much about the subject and

1167:

World History, as the Eurocentric and the California School discusses it, is largely refrained to the post-1500 period, when the world become through the voyages of discovery one world. Therefore, the field is not very large, largely restricted to the 1500-1800, and citations are generally relatively

888:

Please. I am new to Knowledge (XXG). I am here to evaluate the merits of the entry on Duchesne, which appear to be negligible. Anyone can go to your user talk page and see the edit wars you have been involved in and the number of times other users have threatened to block you for disruptive behavior.

2437:

is "significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed." There is no evidence that Duchense has made a significant impact on either the discipline of sociology or the sub-field of historical sociology. An example of a sociologist who has made a significant impact upon her discipline

1481:

World History scholarship isn't something I know much about but I suspect I'm not the only one who's having a bit of trouble with the fact it's claimed he has been cited by nearly all the leading authorities in the field yet only 5 of them seem to be blue links. I recognise it's possible it's simply

948:

for the record, User:Gun Powder Ma has a history of importing personal conflicts from internet forums like chinahistoryforum.com and allempires.com. In fact, his spat with User:Intranetusa originated from a dispute at Chinahistoryforum, where under his account Tibet Libre he dragged over disputes on

336:

35 citations spread out over multiple articles is not evidence of noteworthiness. Even if a single piece were cited 35 times, that would still be of questionable importance. Influential scholars are those who have published articles or books that have been cited hundreds, if not thousands, of times.

4010:

I appreciate the spirit behind this proposal, as if this were a content dispute in an article's talk page, I would be inclined to agree. However, this is a deletion discussion: a closing admin needs to evaluate the arguments for deletion and for keep, including editor behavior, and make a decision.

3566:

What most of these libraries have is a standing order for each one in the series. Brill is a first-rate publisher in the traditional humanities, particularly religion--I would classify it as a good second-level publisher otherwise. What these holdings indicate, unfortunately, is that relatively few

2768:

of the contributors to this volume have cited Duchesne's work. I repeat: not one. It is now certain that Ricardo Duchesne has not debated "most" of the authorities in his field, let alone been cited by nearly all of them. I don't see any argument left for keeping this article. Not sure what else to

2631:

This is a point on which we can all agree: Duchesne is a relatively new scholar and therefore has not yet had the time to accumulate the citation statistics to qualify as having had any significant impact upon his discipline (whichever that may be). Perhaps he will in the future. But for now, 35 in

2259:

regardless of the motive, BlueGrey is in violation of BLP for trying to ridicule on the subject of an article. The notability is in fact dubious, but defacing an article to make it absurdly ddubious as a protest is a violation of WP:POINT in any case, and when done with respect to a BLP, it passes

3471:

I tend to agree with William O'Connolley that a procedural keep may be the best solution with the option to review the matter later. You can't tell me this has been a fair and normal AfD. I have written quite a few bios in WP, some of which were on scholars who may be viewed according to the 'only

3467:

I did not say that a single newspaper article establishes notability alone, but that is is one piece of mosaic which adds to his notability which I believe it does. As for published works exclusively on him, I already posted above "Articles published directly in response to Duchesne work include",

2788:

has he been cited by most authorities in the specific field he is working on? That's the real question. what I think notability depends on here is the reviews of his book. But it's a 2011 book, and , in his subject, reviews often take several years to appear. Incidentally, if we want to go by the

2361:

We don't create articles for people just because they write in newspapers. User:BlueonGray appears to be mainly concerned with the fact that the article on Duchesne is uncritical and paints a glowering picture of him. While initial edits by BoG on the article may have violated WP:BLP, his point is

514:

BlueonGray's editing of the article has been disruptive in the past, but trying to delete an article on a person one believes is non-notable is not an inherently disruptive act. I don't see that you've provided a keep rationale here that rebuts any of the delete arguments put forward - please take

615:

Nobody said these are not noteworthy subjects. By "subject," I am referring to Duchesne. The question is whether Ricardo Duchesne is a noteworthy scholar. Again, according to Google Scholar, his most cited work has been cited only 12 times. Do you have any evidence of a more substantial number of

351:

Below you are saying you are "new to Knowledge (XXG)", so how can you claim you know the threshold for notability? Giving an absolute number as necessary threshold seems absurd, since the field of historical sociology is in any case far smaller than other fields of history. I request you again to

2226:

It's clear that BlueonGray added puffery like "one of the greatest thinkers of the twenty-first century" to emphasize the lack of notability of a scholar that just wrote his first book in 2011. I would not call that outright vandalism, and it was five months ago. It was reverted by another user

4120:

I count 12 deletes, 5 keeps and two procedural keeps. Unfortunately, this sloppiness has been characteristic of the whole debate. I can even understand this because the discussion has been such a mess. Therefore, a new discussion with one statement each may be a viable option. Still, I think a

2902:

If this and even less "important" articles are permitted to remain, Knowledge (XXG) will not run out of pages. Keeping all articles, even stubs, that meet Knowledge (XXG)'s minimum standards causes no major harm to Knowledge (XXG). On the contrary, I believe it benefits Knowledge (XXG) and the

1182:

You can't have it both ways. On the one hand, you want to claim that Duchesne is some sort of important and influential scholar. On the other hand, when it's pointed out that almost no one has cited him, you then emphasize how miniscule his field is. Then, how have historical sociologists like

949:

Roman metal production figures into Knowledge (XXG). I find it in extremely bad faith that Gun Powder Ma knew about the WP:battleground policy, and is using it as a weapon to silence BlueonGray while Gun Powder Ma displayed his battleground mentality in dragging over his personal disputes here.

1700:

is adamant about this, too. Second, remember that RD publishing history mostly goes back only ten years. This comparatively short period of time is another reasoning why counting socks with absolute numbers in the h-index is misleading. You ask for anything else? Start addressing the fact the

272:. Not cited enough in Google Scholar to be authoritative (some of the 12 citations are also duplicates); no reviews; no major posts, societies, or named chairs. The only substantial piece I can see is actually a response by the author of a book that Duchesne reviewed...so yeah, not notable. – 205:

are satisfied. 1) There is no evidence that the subject has made any significant impact upon his discipline. 2) There is no evidence that the subject has received a prestigious award at either the national or the international levels. 3) There is no evidence that he has been elected to any

3468:

but it is unfortunately symptomatic of the whole discussion that after six days still no-one has addressed my point that he has been debated by most of his peers (other than BlueOnGray, who, as people have finally realized, would negate everything which sheds a positive light on RD).

3795:. If they have something to say that does not fit into 10 or 15 pages, they publish a book. I see nothing extraordinary yet to warrant inclusion into an encyclopedia. I do smell an attempt to boost book sales, as the article is not primarily about the author but about the book. -- 1586:

Indeed, editors must give reasons other than their personal opinion. If we went be personal opinions, wikipedia wouldn't be much of an encyclopedia anymore. Ricardo Duchense is not more notable than the myriad of other professors who have written papers. There are thousands of

419:. I suspect BlueonGray is some disgruntled colleague, and it is clear he is not here in the interests of Knowledge (XXG) but because of some personal crusade. For this disruptive behaviour I've proposed a block at Knowledge (XXG):Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. 1504:

The AfD starter, for one, unfortunately does not seem to know much at all because he actually thinks the field of "world history" strechts back to antiquity! This is factually wrong. In reality, "world history" is a field of history which deals with events beginning with

2493:

Therefore, you have to take into account the qualitative side: I have given enough names of notable scholars he has debated and enough titles of peer-reviewed journals where he has been published. You have still not named a single important scholar in the field who has

3162:

Don't know how you came up with "5 research centers", but anyway. The point is that both of them organized and attended a symposium to debate a single article of Duchesne is proof enough that they consider him a peer in the field. This strongly indicates that he is

2654:. I agree with Roscelese, Nsk92, and Xxanthippe. This not a small field, so the number of citations is inadequate for WP:PROF, and I don't see any exceptional contribution--the awfulness of multiculturalism is a horse beaten by many scholars recently, just see 1234:

First of all, Mr. Duchesne is just one of hundreds of unimportant professors who have so far, not been noted by any major scholars. Secondly, the way the article was written was in a manner designed to promote Mr. Duchesne's views, I have removed violations of

3605:

Interesting insight, I know you have professional knowledge. However, some 60 holdings after 7 months is not bad after your own estimations and I observed that every 2-3 days another university library has purchased it (today: 62), so there is some momentum.

2898:

A lot of energy is being wasted over whether to delete an adequate article about a modestly notable subject. The article is question is not slanderous or fawning. The text is clear, with adequate references to support it. The subject has a public presence.

366:

According to Google Scholar, Duchesne's most cited essay, "Between sinocentrism and eurocentrism," has been cited no more than 12 times -- less if you discount the duplicates. That is very weak, indeed. In fact, for a full professor, that is a quite meager

921:

The first part is irrelevant and false. Regarding the second part: according to Google scholar, Duchesne's most successful piece, "Between sinocentrism and eurocentrism," has been cited a mere 12 times -- less if you discount the duplicates. That is quite

2447: 2906:

Knowledge (XXG) becomes more important the more accurate information it contains. Hair-splitting about a subject's notability undermines the entire enterprise. Let's have more adequate articles on minor notables, not fewer. Posterity will thank you.

2760:. According to the book's description, it "presents thirty-three essays by leading historians in their respective fields." It provides "the best guide to current thinking in one of the most dynamic fields of historical scholarship." Fortunately, the 2489:

in our sense is barely ten years old, beginning in the late 1990s. These scholars are mostly fresh behind their ears and just don't have yet the time to accumulate the citation statistics the often cited, but dated works of Tilly and his generation

1620:, because there would be thousands and thousands of such publications, and it would take up far too much space. The very fact that you can list them here in so short a space demonstrates precisely how low the number of citations is for his work.-- 553:, The European Legacy, Journal für Entwicklungspolitik and wrote chapter in books. He has also recently published a book with Brill, so this whole Afd is sadly a kind of lame battling attempt by some dubious outsider who misuses WP, nothing more. 3472:

the pure number of citations count' argumentation line less notable than RD. Yet no-one has ever come around questioning these entries. This whole AfD started from the wrong foot because of the bad faith of the nominator, that's my view anyway.

410:(navigate to Comments on this Article: Posted by Blue on Gray, Feb 12, 2011 5:28 PM and Apr 24, 2011 10:55 PM), so he has a strong political agenda. He got a response by Duchesne which pissed him and now he stalks the article. Poor class. 4015:. We cannot allow AfDs to be hijacked by editors who do not know how to behave or have decorum and self-restraint to realize what AfD is about: if we accept this proposal, what is to keep editors in the future from using this to create 485:

But there are lots of full professors and there are lots of academics, many of whom are not full professors, who have published several dozen articles in peer-reviewed journals and books with Brill. That does not meet the criteria in

3007:

What we need is input from users who have actually edited in the field which RD covers. Since the argument that the scholars who debated RD are leaders in their field has still not been addressed after five days, I have notified per

638:, quite apparently because he died the same year Duchesne's review of his work was published (2005). So what evidence do you have against Duchesne's notability? Name me five important scholars of his field in the last decade who did 3298:

Previous entanglements with users involved in creating an article for AfD does not mean that I get banned from voting or commenting on AfD that the user is involved in for life. I only encountered Ricardo Duchesne's article since

2608:

In regards to 1), it was pointed out that other historical sociologists have published scholarly works that have been cited many thousands of times, so 1) isn't a good reason. In regards to 2), Gun Powder made an important point:

1353:

Peer Vries (Professor at The University of Vienna, former Visiting Scholar at London School of Economics, editor of the Journal of Global History: "Is California the measure of all things global? A rejoinder to Ricardo Duchesne."

3678:

Xantippe, as I explained just above, the odds are about 10:1 that there will indeed be two or three reviews in a year or so. It's not a wild extrapolation, but only Knowledge (XXG) would consider that as indicating notability .

3278: 2342: 4061:

A good point. Counting the votes, I find 13 votes for delete and 6 for keep including nominator and all partisans. On this basis (but remembering that an AfD is NOT A VOTE) the consensus already seems to be fairly clear.

3430:, the leading center-conservative newspaper of Canada, with a daily circulation of 200,000. If he were not notable, why did the editorial staff of the National Post entrust him with a leading comment on a sensitive issue? 1267:

requests for notability a "substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates". Both is the case for Duchesne as can be seen from below. I did a search for works only in English which shows that

1131:, if that is indeed the field to which you are referring, is demonstrably false. In any case, when compared to the work of notable scholars, 35 citations in total and 12 maximum for a single piece is really quite paltry. 4040:

A brief discussion which after two weeks still did not manage to address the main point to establish his notability, that is whether RD has been debated by all of the main authorities in the field, as I argue, or not.

170: 3189: 3148:, was published by University of California Press and similarly received excellent reviews and endorsements. Clearly, they didn't become top scholars by publishing a book review that was then heavily criticized.-- 2632:

total just doesn't cut it. My suggestion, then, is to delete the entry for Duchesne until he accumulates a substantial number of citations. I think we can all agree that biographical entries should be created for

3106:

Just out of curiosity, what makes them top world historians? Through what achievements did they earn their academic notability? Obviously, my next question would be: how do their achievements compare to those of

1524:. That is why I don't understand why the comparatively well-researched article on Duchesne should be deleted. We would rob WP of one of the few entries on scholars in the field we have. This does not make sense. 1460:

Patrick O'Brien, "Ten Years of Debate on the Origins of the Great Divergence between the Economies of Europe and China during the Era of Mercantilism and Industrialization," /Reviews in History/ (February 2011).

1379:

B.H. Moss, "Republican Socialism and the Making of the Working Class in Britain, France, and the United States: A Critique of Thompsonian Culturalism," /Comparative Studies in Society and History/, Vol. 35, No.2

3498:

has not yet been cited, this is small wonder considering that it was only launched in February this year. Most academic journals only appear biannual, so the first reviews will not appear until fall or winter.

2730:

Huh, fringe? It is getting more weird by the day. The book has not been peer-reviewed because it takes usually one to two years, before such a thing happens. This is the printed world, not real time Wiki, dude.

1239:

from the article, and the creator of the article, User:Gun Powder Ma has been inserting Duchesne's work onto multiple other articles and calling it "influential", which may be seen as an attempt at puffery. See

2317: 403: 223: 3532:

which have the book on the shelf, over 40 alone from the USA. WorldCat, though, is far from complete with regard to Europe. The global impact of Duchesne's book is corrobated by a search in the catalogue

687:(d. 2009), who held a distinguished professorship at Johns Hopkins and whose work has been cited thousands of times. Duchesne simply does not compare to these scholars. Also, according to Google Scholar, 4177:(if new users are supposed to vote.) I think I understand the keep and delete reasoning, and I agree with Noleander that secondary sources (discussing Duchesne himself in depth) are needed, but lacking. 2550:, not a young sub-sub-field limited to a few scholars. There are countless young sub-sub-fields in which a very small group of scholars debate with one another. That does not meet any of the criteria in 1401:

and Christopher Isett, "England's Divergence from China's Yangzi Delta: Property Relations, Microeconomics, and Patterns of Development," /The Journal of Asian Studies/, Vol. 61, No. 2 (2002), 609-662.

2944:" hits home. In the mean time, puffing up someone bio with every embellished resume detail is fawning that discredits Knowledge (XXG) in the eyes of the public as a mere carrier of advertisement. See 2830:

I haven't found any significant coverage in the notations, and I tried. I mostly agree with what you are saying (except WP:AUTHOR, but Ill ask you directly), but this guy is not notable, but his book

2466:. I repeat: 12 times. Where is the evidence of Duchesne's significant impact upon his discipline? Debating people is not evidence of significant impact, since academia is all about debate.-- 2932:

You surely chose an odd article to make your first deletion discussion participation in you account's history. "Minor notables" are indeed a great problem for Knowledge (XXG), just pass by

1053:- such as signifiant awards after grad school, journal editorships, prestigious lectures/lecture series given, extensive published of the subject's work or anything else indicating passing 3992:

No. Your idea of "extended contents" is a big part of the problem. Content is for the article, or maybe its talk page. What should go here is only a brief discussion of its significance. —

2565:

Also, Duchesne earned his PhD in 1994. According to you, he belongs to a field that was created "in the late 1990s". In which discipline was he working before his field was even created?--

1386:

Joseph M. Bryant, "The West and the Rest Revisited: Debating Capitalist Origins, European Colonialism, and the Advent of Modernity," /Canadian Journal of Sociology/, Vol. 31, No. 4 (2006).

1361:

John M. Hobson (London School of Economics): "Explaining the Rise of the West: A Reply to Ricardo Duchesne." The Journal of the Historical Society, Vol. 6, No.4 (December 2006), pp 579-599

1451:

Eric Mielants, "The Epistemological Challenges of Studying the Global Economic Crisis and its Social and Political Consequences in the Long Run," /Revista Versus Academica/ (Agosto 2009).

463:

edited this one article, invariably in a negative manner. I think you should disclose your IP to an admin, so that your real identity can be determined. You should be aware that WP is no

2870:

real reviews for it. It may be too early, but I've not even seen it on "books received" lists that journals sometimes publish antedating reviews. There is a sort of adulatory post on it

1127:, who has had a very distinguished career and whose work has been cited literally thousands of times. The claim that Duchesne has been cited by "nearly all authorities" in the field of 3140:

You're holding Wong and Goldstone to one standard and Duchesne to another. The former have been cited hundreds of times each. Wong currently runs 5 research centers at UCLA. His book,

246: 131: 3917:

agreeing not to take part, leaving the discussion to neutral editors. If they won't agree to this then the discussion should take place with a formal topic ban on those editors.

1307:, The European Legacy, Journal für Entwicklungspolitik, The Journal of the Historical Society', apart from articles in several monographs. His recent monograph is published by 667:? In one of my comments below, I give a couple of examples of influential world historians. Here, I will give examples of influential historical sociologists. These include 1) 2936:. The lack of adequate independent coverage usually results in distorted biographies one way or the other. Wait until this guy says or does something controversial that hits 859:

For the record, if anyone is turned off by Western civilization, it is because of the arrogance and tastelessness of its self-appointed representatives like Ricardo Duchesne.

533:

Coming to WP only in order to try to erase an article about a person with which you have had at another place an acrimonius debate is in itself an absolutely disruptive act (

77: 3017: 1609: 164: 3909:

It is obvious that this discussion has generated much more heat than light. The best way forward would seem to me to be to close this discussion and start a new one with

2033:

I am rather interest in yours, since you seem to misunderstand and overinterpret h-index, as if RD were not publishing in the humanities where counts are quantitatively

1454:

R. Prazniak, "Menzies and the New Chinoiserie: Is Sinocentrism the Answer to Eurocentrism in Studies of Modernity?" /The Medieval History Journal/, vol. 13, No1. (2010).

865:. Knowledge (XXG)'s BlueonGray refuses to acknowledge whether he is the same person (see above). The whole Afd is, given its unsubstantiateness, a thinly-veiled case of 3363: 1701:

Duchesne has been debating with most of the notable scholars in the field. This means he has been recognized widely as an important figure in the discourse. This

3546:

In other words, it is evident that Duchesne's book will have a major impact in the field even though it takes some more weeks before the first reviews arrive.

2754:

the number of times it's been repeated. Thus far, we have seen no compelling evidence for this claim. However, Oxford University Press has just published the

3281:, holds a grudge against me. I can handle this, but that the AfD process is misused for personal motives, is another matter and sheds not a good light on WP. 3089:

There is no evidence that the "symposium" was held specifically for the subject's article. It's just another publication in a Marxist journal by the subject.

2463: 1751:: Have you addressed the fact the RD has been debated by most of the most influential thinkers in the field where he is active (world history, 1500-1800)? 3445:

Publishing a single article even in a leading newspaper is so far from any of our notability criteria that it is laughable. We don't need published works

1392:

Berhanu Abehaz, "Persistent Stasis in a Tributary Mode of Production: The Peasant Economy of Ethiopia," /Journal of Agrarian Change/, Vol. 5, No.3 (2003).

2459: 2231:. I would AGF that BlueonGray did not know any better at the time, like how to nominate the article for deletion; he was advised only a few days ago at 1123:, who holds a distinguished professorship at Cambridge and whose work has been cited hundreds of times. A notable world historian would be someone like 1020: 3964:

This would be a reasonable way forward -- but I would like (first) to see an admin consider whether there is actually consensus for deletion here.

3169:

The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

2190:. Duchesne's most successful article to date has been cited by a mere 12 people. What is the evidence of his scholarly importance or significance? 3144:, was published by Cornell and received excellent reviews by top journals. Goldstone holds a prestigious professorship at George Mason. His book, 3817: 1765:

Is that actually true? By "debated" do you mean "Duchesne reviewed a book by X, so X responded to Duchesne's criticisms in a separate article"?

322:

debate him. He is one of the important thinkers and he is integral part of the debate in the English-speaking world, like it BlueonGray or not.

2871: 3824:. With two computer technologists voting delete based on a similarly vacuous statement within less than hour, I'd rather think this smells of 3352:

is not being very forthcoming about something. S/he included three pieces of information about Duchesne that simply isn't publicly available:

3421: 1304: 634:. Everybody who knows the field will immediately recognize these scholars. The only important figure who did not cite and debate Duchesne is 550: 3527: 721:

Incidentally, I wholeheartedly agree Knowledge (XXG) should not be a battleground. That is why there are neutral and impartial criteria in

104: 99: 3865:--- I couldn't find evidence, and the article doesn't present any, that this person is notable under the accepted criteria for Academics 2622:

These scholars are mostly fresh behind their ears and just don't have yet the time to accumulate the citation statistics the often cited

108: 3164: 3069:

research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

2761: 2485:

is a. forty years older and thus his work could accumulate forty years more of citations b. not a world historian anyway. The field of

1797: 1432:, "The Voyages of Zhen He: State Power and Maritime Trade in Ming China". /The Journal of the Historical Society/. Vol 8, No. 3 (2008). 967: 395: 1837:

this is copied from my post at ANI, but I agreed to stop the dispute at ANI and bring the problem here, so this is not forumshopping.

1078:

Your page says you are interested in world history, so you'll know that his citability includes nearly all authorities in the field:

17: 4144: 4086: 3044: 2999: 1692:: This is a rather schematic argument: h-index is designed primarily for scientists of the natural science, where the citations are 1558: 91: 2848:

No, you did not try. You did not even read this Afd. See above: Articles published directly in response to Duchesne work include.

862: 3304: 2206: 1408: 1147: 441:, then surely that can be demonstrated for everyone. What exactly is the evidence of his scholarly significance and influence?-- 2562:. Every academic belongs to a formal discipline. Within historical sociology, Duchesne's scholarly impact is barely detectable. 1778: 1414:

David Laibman, "The End of History? The Problem of Agency and Change". /Science and Society/, Vol. 70, No. 2 (2006), pp180-204.

524: 281: 185: 3770:-- ignoring all the crap above, any normal evaluation of this person reasonably comes to the conclusion that he does not meet 2174: 1977: 1442: 1383:

B.H. Moss, "Marx and the Permanent Revolution in France: Background to the Communist Manifesto," /Socialist Register/ (1998).

1119:

is a very, very big and ancient field, going back to Herodotus. A notable contemporary world historian would be someone like

152: 2756: 1612:

and see that he has been cited only 30 times. You couldn't possibly list all the publications that cite a real scholar like

598: 1696:

than in the humanities (I'd say by a factor of ten or more). In the humanities, however, much less articles are published.

1501:

the players? Again, with a single exception I recognize all of the most important names in the field have debated Duchesne.

691:

of them cite Duchesne. Please, the very suggestion that Duchesne has influenced all of the most eminent scholars in either

3534: 1045:

somewhere in low single digits. Having 35 separate citations total is far below of what we usually require for satisfying

683:, who has a distinguished professorship at Harvard and whose work has been cited thousands of times; the late 5) the late 515:

complaints about user conduct to the appropriate forum and work here on putting together a policy-based keep rationale. –

352:

provide the allegedly 12 citations, I'll add the rest. You will see than that most authorities in the field debated him.

3774:

or any other standard: no large number of citations, no significant awards or prestigious positions, no news coverage.

3383: 3290: 3079: 471:. So, are you identical with this Blue on Gray who is so acid on Duchesne in the Racism in Academia article, yes or no? 4201: 2450:. An example of a historical sociologist who has made a significant impact in the sub-field of historical sociology is 1520:

As you see, most of the other WP articles on world historians are very undeveloped, even of the top authority himself,

1376:

G.M. Tamas, "Telling The Truth About Class." In Leo Panitch and Colin Leys, eds., /Telling the Truth/ (LeftWord, 2005).

36: 1497: 679:, who holds a distinguished professorship at Harvard University and whose work has been cited thousands of times; 4) 459:. Now back to you and your dubious motives. Are you a colleague of Duchesne? You are aware that since March you have 3253:

many controversial figures who have articles on wiki, but they aren't platforms for their views to be promoted. See

1438:

Christ Isett, State, /Peasant, and Merchant on the Manchurian Frontier, 1644-1862/. Stanford University Press, 2007.

455:

He is a full professor, and has published several dozen articles in peer-reviewed journals and recently a book with

3969: 3779: 3212: 1879:

below this is a list of times GPM inserted Duchesne's work into multiple articles on history and "multiculturalism"

1395:

Neil Davidson, "How Revolutionary Were the Bourgeois Revolutions?" /Historical Materialism/, Vol. 13, No. 3 (2005).

1300: 546: 2941: 1457:

Philippe Minard, "Revolution Industrielle: Divergence Orient-Occident/" Revue de synthese/. Vol 131. No. 3 (2010).

1435:

Jonathan Reynolds, "Africa and World History: from Antipathy to Synergy/," History Compass/, Vol 15, No. 6 (2007).

1420:

Peter Coclanis, "Atlantic World or Atlantic/World." /The William and Mary Quarterly/. Vol 63, No. 4 (October 2006)

146: 3329:

As I have already given my vote, and made my points on this AfD. so I will retire from this and await the result.

3053:"Between sinocentrism and eurocentrism: Debating Andre Gunder Frank's re-orient: Global economy in the Asian age" 2388: 2348: 2170: 1973: 1796:. Reads like an extended book advertisement with a dash of resumecruft. Does not appear to meet the criteria of 1373:

Govind P. Sreenivasan, /The Peasants of Ottobeuren, A Rural Society in Early Modern Europe/ (Cambridge UP, 2004).

2462:. Duchense's most successful work to date is his essay, "Between sinocentrism and eurocentrism," which has been 866: 835: 776: 534: 464: 4200:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a

3997: 3731: 3458: 2287:. Contributors to this debate may be interested to know that there is a long thread on related matters at AN/I. 1735: 402:

who just edits this article and hold a particular grudge against Duchesne. He is currently for the 2nd time at

35:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a

4186: 4160: 4146: 4130: 4110: 4088: 4071: 4050: 4029: 4001: 3987: 3973: 3958: 3944: 3926: 3895: 3874: 3851: 3837: 3804: 3783: 3762: 3733: 3690: 3666: 3633: 3615: 3578: 3555: 3481: 3462: 3439: 3405: 3338: 3324: 3266: 3243: 3224: 3179: 3157: 3133: 3116: 3098: 3033: 3001: 2981: 2957: 2922: 2883: 2857: 2843: 2817: 2800: 2782: 2740: 2721: 2684: 2667: 2645: 2574: 2531: 2475: 2406: 2375: 2352: 2329: 2298: 2271: 2244: 2221: 2178: 2142: 2124: 2109: 2087: 2046: 2027: 2009: 1981: 1954: 1811: 1782: 1760: 1739: 1714: 1679: 1650: 1629: 1596: 1580: 1560: 1533: 1491: 1470: 1426:

R. Langlois, "The Closing of the Sociological Mind" /The Canadian Journal of Sociology/, Vol 33, No. 1 (2008).

1253: 1216: 1177: 1162: 1103: 1066: 1032: 999: 931: 916: 898: 882: 814: 796: 766: 752: 734: 708: 651: 625: 610: 580: 562: 528: 499: 480: 450: 428: 376: 361: 346: 331: 285: 261: 238: 215: 61: 1355: 1241: 1049:

on citability grounds. I am not seeing anything else in the record to hang one's hat on in terms of passing

988: 142: 4126: 4046: 3983: 3891: 3833: 3629: 3621: 3611: 3551: 3502:

However, even now the notability of his book can be still positively assessed from considering two aspects:

3477: 3435: 3401: 3286: 3220: 3175: 3129: 3075: 3029: 2853: 2813: 2736: 2527: 2325: 2120: 2042: 1756: 1710: 1529: 1466: 1173: 1099: 1028: 912: 878: 792: 748: 647: 606: 558: 476: 424: 357: 327: 318:

and many others. One would have rather difficulties finding someone important from Duchesne's field who did

2965: 2945: 2918: 2511: 2260:

the boundaries of disruption. If it were not several months ago, I would block for something like this.

2194: 1135: 854: 784: 740: 671:, who holds a distinguished professorship at Columbia and whose work has been cited thousands of times; 2) 407: 3922: 3196: 1091: 846: 772: 3417: 2937: 2163:- this looks to be a bad faith nom - BlueonGray has engaged in deliberate vandalism of the article, e.g. 1766: 4139: 4081: 3965: 3775: 2994: 1553: 192: 95: 4182: 3334: 3320: 3262: 3064: 2371: 2187: 1950: 1697: 1592: 1264: 1249: 1013: 995: 802: 722: 675:, who holds a distinguished professorship at UPenn and whose work has also been thousands of times; 3) 568: 487: 469:

Knowledge (XXG) is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles

438: 202: 3277:: I know people are tired of all this but it still needs mentioning that DÜNGÁNÈ, who has had created 2341:

appears to be a bad faith nomination. Also he has written for the National post and the Vancouver Sun

1857:

Gun Powder Ma calls Duchesne's work an "influential critique" on another article, violating WP:PEACOCK

415:

This is btw the second time BlueonGray tries to delete the article. After the first time, the article

4156: 4067: 3954: 3940: 3662: 3512:, one the most renowned international publishing houses for science and particularly humanities, see 3379: 3153: 3112: 3094: 2778: 2641: 2570: 2559: 2507: 2471: 2430: 2344: 2313: 2294: 2217: 2202: 2138: 2105: 2083: 2023: 1675: 1646: 1625: 1576: 1347: 1337: 1327: 1296: 1212: 1200: 1158: 1143: 1124: 927: 894: 810: 762: 730: 704: 696: 664: 621: 586: 576: 542: 495: 446: 372: 342: 234: 211: 3825: 3254: 3009: 2363: 1942: 1841: 1417:

Eric Mielants, /The Origins of Capitalism and the Rise of the West /(Temple University Press, 2007).

1236: 3993: 3758: 3724: 3454: 2422: 2130: 2001: 1774: 1731: 1487: 520: 277: 178: 4178: 3713: 3330: 3316: 3258: 2969: 2705: 2367: 1946: 1588: 1295:

B. he has published in many well-known peer-reviewed journals on history and sociology, including

1245: 1207:

managed to produce scholarship cited by thousands of people? Again, you can't have it both ways.--

991: 4122: 4106: 4042: 4025: 3979: 3914: 3887: 3847: 3829: 3800: 3625: 3607: 3547: 3473: 3431: 3416:

Back on topic. There is evidence that RD has made some impact even outside academia (point 7. of

3397: 3371: 3349: 3282: 3216: 3171: 3125: 3071: 3025: 2977: 2953: 2912: 2879: 2849: 2839: 2809: 2732: 2717: 2680: 2663: 2523: 2321: 2240: 2116: 2100:

by now and make allowance for them. I am still interested in your own, so far unstated, reasons.

2038: 2005: 1806: 1752: 1706: 1525: 1462: 1169: 1095: 1024: 908: 874: 788: 744: 643: 635: 602: 567:

With respect, publishing in many noteworthy peer-reviewed journals does not meet the criteria in

554: 472: 420: 353: 323: 56: 2987: 2933: 2232: 1448:

Marcel van der Linden, /Workers of the World. Essays Toward a Global Labor History/. Brill 2008.

315: 302:, Peer Vries (University of Vienna), John Hobson (The Eastern Origins of Western civilization), 3208: 398:. People should be wary: This is a bad faith nomination and clear misuse of AfD. BlueonGray is 3918: 3239: 3052: 1184: 1120: 676: 571:. Who has cited these articles? What evidence is there of the noteworthiness of the subject?-- 257: 158: 29:

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.

4016: 3792: 3771: 3750: 2693: 2551: 2543: 2434: 1727: 1667: 1054: 1050: 1046: 4136: 4078: 4077:

I suggest that a new neutral drama-free discussing should start, and this one to be closed.

3870: 3508: 3312: 3021: 2991: 2555: 2418: 1550: 1514: 1389:

Robert Markley, /The Far East and the English Imagination, 1600-1739/. (Cambridge UP, 2006).

1204: 805:. I would like to focus on those criteria. So far, Duchesne does not meet any one of them.-- 684: 590: 538: 337:

Duchesne's most successful piece has 12 citations -- less, if you discount the duplicates.--

311: 87: 67: 4012: 2697: 2503: 2309: 1969: 904: 593:' are absolutely noteworthy subjects in history. RD has been for years part of the debate. 4152: 4063: 3950: 3936: 3910: 3658: 3375: 3149: 3108: 3090: 2774: 2637: 2566: 2467: 2399: 2290: 2213: 2198: 2134: 2101: 2079: 2067: 2019: 1671: 1642: 1621: 1613: 1572: 1208: 1192: 1154: 1139: 1062: 923: 890: 842: 806: 758: 726: 700: 672: 617: 572: 491: 442: 368: 338: 230: 207: 3516:. Notably, it is not just a 'stand-alone publication', but part of Brill's long-running 1284:, John M. Hobson (three of the four leading scholars of the opposing California School), 3204: 2499: 1276:(the leading Eurocentrist and probably single-most living scholar in the entire field), 850: 780: 399: 3754: 3308: 3060: 3048: 2063: 1770: 1483: 1398: 1333: 1285: 1281: 1087: 516: 307: 273: 3513: 4102: 4021: 3843: 3796: 3686: 3574: 3426: 2973: 2949: 2908: 2875: 2835: 2796: 2713: 2676: 2659: 2482: 2451: 2439: 2267: 2236: 1801: 1617: 1429: 1289: 1196: 1188: 1128: 1116: 1112: 692: 680: 668: 660: 404:

Knowledge (XXG):Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive201#Ricardo Duchesne

49: 3215:. This means Duchesne is integral part of the debate in his field and thus notable. 2675:. And please move the extensive threaded discussion with headings to the talk page. 1441:

Peer Vries, "The California School and Beyond: How to Study the Great Divergence," /

3235: 3056: 2071: 1608:: There is no use listing the articles that cite Duchesne's work. Anyone can go to 1521: 1510: 1404: 1273: 1083: 1079: 757:

That's irrelevant. I would be grateful if you could kindly stick to the criteria.--

303: 299: 253: 1423:

Peter Gran, "Modern World History as the Rise of the Rich" /History Compass/ 2007.

903:

Yeah, you have been "evaluating" it since March with unreferenced edits violating

853:, invariably negatively. He is identical in name with one BlueonGray who actually 125: 3866: 2075: 2059: 3538: 3200: 1844:/puffery on Duchesne's part, appearing to have a conflict of interest with him 2392: 1058: 3978:

I agree if one statement is allowed (with an appendix as extended contents).

3716:

to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

490:. The criteria for notability are for scholars who stand out from the rest.-- 3051:) which was specifically held for the purpose to discuss Duchesne's article 2426: 3374:

conspicuously refuses to say how s/he managed to obtain this information.--

2362:

still valid since the article has no criticism in it and just looks like a

630:

Duchesne is actually cited more than 35 times and that by many of the most

1767:

Not that "has debated a notable person" is a measure of notability anyway.

4142: 4084: 3681: 3569: 3523: 3063:, two of the other top world historians. This proves that RD complies to 2997: 2791: 2262: 1556: 1343: 1323: 1311:, one of the most renowned publishing houses in the humanities worldwide. 1277: 1041:, basically per Roscelese. Citability in GScholar is extremely low, with 801:

Disruptive behavior is focusing on everything other than the criteria in

2655: 2097: 1663: 1272:

A. Duchesne has been cited by most authorities in the field, including

1042: 4094: 3039:

Symposium of top authorities specifically held for Duchesne's article

594: 2514:, made you then register here and stalk the article since February ( 2058:: Then how do you explain the fact that other sociologists, such as 2037:, by an entire order of magnitude(!), than in the natural sciences. 2620:

in our sense is barely ten years old, beginning in the late 1990s.

3362:

Duchesne's membership on the doctoral selection committee for The

2986:

Agreed, WP can not run out of articles unlike paper enclopyedias.

2863: 1308: 456: 3207:. Morris has published recently a widely received book, see e.g. 1641:

scholars, not mediocrities who fail to stand out from the rest.--

1019:

Contrary to what BlueonGray claims, I am currently counting over

4194:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.

3749:

sources that are independent enough to meet notability, such as

2874:, but some extremists endorsing it doesn't seem very promising. 1316:

Articles published directly in response to Duchesne work include

861:(Posted by Blue on Gray, Feb 12, 2011 5:28 PM). Nine days later 3055:, the one with the 12 citations. Participants are, inter alia, 2078:, have produced scholarly works cited by thousands of people?-- 541:

has published in many noteworthy peer-reviewed journal such as

4135:(reword)We should allow a five day break in between AFD's IMO. 3043:

At the bottom of the Google Scholar link you find an entry on

966:

Not only that, Gun Powder Ma himself displays tendencies of a

3396:

has been blocked for being disruptive on "Ricardo Duchesne".

3370:

The second two were included to build Duchesne's notability.

1496:

Well, as you know referring to the number of "blue links" is

871:

Knowledge (XXG) is not a place to...import personal conflicts

642:

cite him? You won't find them, but be welcomed to go ahead.

224:

list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions

3620:

Took a look into the catalogue today again: +1. Purchaser:

3544:

have also the book in store, even though it is in English.

2115:

I have contributed them above, so why don't you read them?

1244:

for the questionable behavior by the creator of the article

699:

is so extreme as to be inevitably and demonstrably wrong.--

2481:

Huh, the comparison could not be more apples and oranges:

1941:

he changed it to "most influential", which still violates

3359:

the year in which Duchesne was promoted to full professor

3045:

Eurocentrism, Sinocentrism and World History: A Symposium

1945:, however, I've just removed it, he might change it back. 989:

this report for evidence of the allegations I made above.

739:

With respect, you are still evading the question whether

1939:

GPM calling H. S. Harris the "foremost Hegelian scholar"

3821: 3393: 3300: 2519: 2515: 2288: 2228: 2186:: Your comment fails to address any of the criteria in 2167: 2164: 1938: 1916: 1914: 1912: 1910: 1908: 1906: 1904: 1902: 1900: 1856: 889:

My suggestion is that you stick to the issue at hand.--

779:

mentality are usually blocked from Knowledge (XXG) and

631: 416: 121: 117: 113: 177: 2589:

Two different reasons have been given for Duchense's

1336:, "Europe vs. Asia: Missing Data and Misconceptions" 298:, including by leading scholars in the field such as 3828:and that the vote has finally become a total sham. 2942:

becomes a source of dismay to their original authors

3723:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 2903:ever-expanding community of Knowledge (XXG) users. 1346:, "Early Modern Economic History in the Long Run," 855:'debated' Duchesne this February on a Canadian site 841:Third-party users have a right to be informed that 247:

list of Social science-related deletion discussions

191: 3146:Revolution and Rebellion in the Early Modern World 2018:And your reasons based on Knowledge (XXG) policy? 1972:. Calling someones work "influential" isn't a COI 1571:And your reasons based on Knowledge (XXG) policy? 787:? Why do misuse WP for your personal antipathies? 406:. I strongly suspect BlueonGray is identical with 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 4204:). No further edits should be made to this page. 3745:- My brief research does not turn up sufficient 2636:scholarly impact, not speculative projections.-- 2421:states that he is a historical sociologist. His 2229:with a different summary "highly unencyclopedic" 3364:Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council 3301:GPM inserted his works and links to the article 437:If Duchesne "absolutely" meets the criteria in 3303:on multiple wikipedia pages that I read, like 3014:users who are known for expertise in the field 2429:. The particular branch in which he works is 2308:They may also be interested in this possible 2096:We are all familiar with the vagaries of the 1407:, "Why England and the West? Why Not China?" 8: 3020:of the main article on the subject, that is 1340:, Vol. 67, No. 2 (Summer 2003), pp. 184-195. 1330:, Vol. 67, No. 2 (Summer 2003), pp. 173-184. 725:. I would like to stick to those criteria.-- 245:Note: This debate has been included in the 222:Note: This debate has been included in the 3494:While it is true that Duchesne's main book 2546:asks for significant impact in a scholarly 2512:which you commented there aggressively upon 2413:Significant Impact on Scholarly Discipline? 3449:Duchesne, what we need is published works 2498:debated with Duchesne. As an aside, for a 1825: 1326:, "Beyond Sinocentrism and Eurocentrism", 616:citations for anything he has published?-- 244: 221: 2558:, which you created, Duchesne belongs to 1662:. GS cites are 12, 8, 4, 4, 3 to give an 3541:14 Central European university libraries 2894:Is Knowledge (XXG) running out of pages? 1350:, Vol. 68, No1 (Spring 2004), pp. 80-90. 3188:+ Citation by another important figure 2593:(12 max for a single piece; 35 total): 1443:Austrian Journal of Development Studies 863:Knowledge (XXG)'s BlueonGray registered 306:(Director of the UCLA Asia Institute), 201:I don't see how any of the criteria in 75: 3496:The Uniqueness of Western Civilization 2456:Coercion, Capital, and European States 2133:, or are you answering on his behalf? 1798:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (academics) 968:Knowledge (XXG):Single-purpose account 417:was sufficiently expanded and restored 78:Articles for deletion/Ricardo Duchesne 1670:. Is there anything else? Too early. 1305:Review of Radical Political Economics 551:Review of Radical Political Economics 394:: Ricardo Duchesene absolutely meets 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 3949:I support this creative suggestion. 2757:The Oxford Handbook of World History 2554:. Again, according to the entry for 2314:User talk:BlueonGray#WP:Battleground 1726:. No evidence of passing any of the 3820:and did not include the book until 3518:Studies in Critical Social Sciences 2866:in Feb, yet I was unable to locate 1366:Cited by other scholars (selection) 296:over 35 citations in Google Scholar 74: 4151:I don't understand what you mean. 2972:. This argument here is invalid.-- 2602:2) Duchesne's field is very young. 2599:1) Duchesne's field is very small. 2366:of Duchesne's work and viewpoints. 1358:2.2 (2005): 30 pars. 22 Jun. 2006. 24: 4011:This decision can be appealed to 2591:extremely low number of citations 1992:Back to your scheduled discussion 1509:, when the world became one true 771:It is not irrelevant. Disruptive 4093: 3424:in January 2011 in the Canadian 3305:History of printing in East Asia 2708:idea is not enough to establish 1409:Journal of Economic Perspectives 1411:, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Summer 2006). 2940:, and then the full force of " 2834:be (haven't looked into it).-- 1498:Knowledge (XXG):Self-reference 783:. So we can conclude you are 62:02:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC) 1: 4187:02:16, 9 September 2011 (UTC) 4161:23:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC) 4147:22:57, 6 September 2011 (UTC) 4131:15:02, 6 September 2011 (UTC) 4111:02:41, 6 September 2011 (UTC) 4089:02:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC) 4072:00:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC) 4051:14:51, 6 September 2011 (UTC) 4030:00:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC) 4002:00:04, 6 September 2011 (UTC) 3988:21:38, 5 September 2011 (UTC) 3974:07:07, 5 September 2011 (UTC) 3959:23:25, 4 September 2011 (UTC) 3945:20:25, 4 September 2011 (UTC) 3927:20:23, 4 September 2011 (UTC) 3896:23:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 3875:09:31, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 3852:16:06, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 3838:23:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 3805:08:45, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 3791:-- Academics write articles, 3784:17:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 3763:02:05, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 3734:00:16, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 3634:08:34, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 3616:08:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 3535:Karlsruher Virtueller Katalog 2749:Cited By Nearly All Scholars? 2712:. Also resumecruft per COI.-- 2585:Field Too Small or Too Young? 2209:) 10:56, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2129:My question was addressed to 1968:I don't see any violation of 1840:Gun Powder Ma has engaged in 1666:of 4. Totally inadequate for 1150:) 12:22, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1111:What is your field, exactly? 659:What field is this, exactly? 3842:I reject this accusation. -- 2988:Knowledge (XXG) is not paper 1705:a strong reason for a keep. 3691:03:00, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 3667:22:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3579:03:00, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 3556:08:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3482:20:21, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3463:17:49, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3440:07:39, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3406:07:31, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3384:04:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3339:16:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3325:16:02, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3291:07:31, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3267:02:40, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3244:02:14, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3225:21:59, 29 August 2011 (UTC) 3180:07:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3158:03:57, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 3134:21:59, 29 August 2011 (UTC) 3117:01:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC) 3099:00:18, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 3080:00:23, 29 August 2011 (UTC) 3034:00:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC) 3002:22:00, 28 August 2011 (UTC) 2982:21:48, 28 August 2011 (UTC) 2958:21:22, 27 August 2011 (UTC) 2923:17:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC) 2884:05:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC) 2858:21:24, 28 August 2011 (UTC) 2844:04:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC) 2818:21:24, 28 August 2011 (UTC) 2801:02:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC) 2783:23:46, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2741:21:24, 28 August 2011 (UTC) 2722:23:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2685:21:14, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2668:21:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2646:16:47, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2575:14:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2532:13:08, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2476:12:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2407:22:37, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 2376:02:43, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 2353:22:30, 29 August 2011 (UTC) 2330:13:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2299:11:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2272:04:40, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 2245:22:04, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2222:11:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2179:07:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2143:11:36, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2125:08:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2110:08:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2088:13:08, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2047:07:56, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2028:07:35, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 2010:07:04, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1982:07:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1955:00:56, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1812:18:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1783:23:52, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1761:07:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1740:01:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1715:07:52, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1680:22:55, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1651:21:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1630:19:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1597:00:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1581:23:52, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1561:23:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1534:09:31, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1492:08:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC) 1471:19:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1254:17:34, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1217:19:36, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1178:19:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1163:12:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1104:06:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1082:, Peer Vries, John Hobson, 1067:02:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1033:00:36, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 1000:17:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 932:12:24, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 917:06:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 899:04:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 883:00:36, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 815:14:22, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 797:22:45, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 767:22:35, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 753:22:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 735:22:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 709:13:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 652:23:10, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 626:22:35, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 611:22:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 581:22:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 563:22:03, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 529:21:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 500:22:11, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 481:21:55, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 451:21:50, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 429:21:35, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 377:11:58, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 362:06:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 347:03:51, 25 August 2011 (UTC) 332:22:43, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 286:21:02, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 262:18:12, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 239:17:44, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 216:17:29, 24 August 2011 (UTC) 4221: 3537:(KVK). This shows that an 3195:+ recent disputation with 2502:who has come to WP with a 2316:and the discussion on the 1301:Journal of Peasant Studies 849:who has been ever editing 547:Journal of Peasant Studies 3506:the book is published by 3356:Duchesne's place of birth 2862:His book was launched by 1549:Seems notable to me IMO. 741:this resentful BlueonGray 4197:Please do not modify it. 3818:exists since August 2010 3018:top ten registered users 2433:. The first criteria in 1021:30-35 separate citations 400:a single-purpose account 32:Please do not modify it. 4017:wall of text disruption 3622:University of Cambridge 3529:60 university libraries 3165:notable according to #1 3038: 1445:/, Vol 24, No 4 (2008). 1356:World History Connected 857:in a resentful manner: 785:this enraged BlueonGray 773:single-purpose accounts 3816:Actually, the article 3348:It is also clear that 2500:single-purpose account 2448:cited over 4,000 times 2000:Seems notable enough. 1092:Ian Morris (historian) 847:single-purpose account 73:AfDs for this article: 3526:already lists around 2696:. Beyond that, fails 2387:. I fully agree with 1348:Science & Society 1338:Science & Society 1328:Science & Society 1297:Science & Society 851:only this one article 781:you fit the bill 100% 632:important authorities 543:Science & Society 3420:): he has published 2560:Historical sociology 2431:Historical sociology 2389:William M. Connolley 2312:of the AfD starter: 2171:William M. Connolley 1974:William M. Connolley 1821:Conflict of Interest 1292:and Patrick O'Brien. 1201:Immanuel Wallerstein 1125:Immanuel Wallerstein 697:Historical sociology 665:Historical sociology 587:Western civilization 2704:of a promoter of a 2423:Academic discipline 3372:User:Gun Powder Ma 3350:User:Gun Powder Ma 3213:Review by Guardian 3209:Review of NY Times 3067:, namely that his 2318:WP:BLP Noticeboard 636:Andre Gunder Frank 44:The result was 3736: 3520:series (vol. 28). 3142:China Transformed 2762:Table of Contents 2460:cited 2,600 times 2211: 2197:comment added by 1988: 1987: 1810: 1185:Orlando Patterson 1152: 1138:comment added by 1121:Christopher Bayly 1090:, Tonio Andrade, 677:Orlando Patterson 597:, for one, gives 408:this Blue on Gray 367:accomplishment.-- 294:Comment: I count 264: 250: 241: 227: 4212: 4199: 4097: 3966:Nomoskedasticity 3793:that's their job 3776:Nomoskedasticity 3729: 3722: 3718: 3313:Multiculturalism 3022:Great Divergence 2926: 2769:say, other than 2556:Ricardo Duchesne 2542:The criteria in 2508:big as barn door 2419:Ricardo Duchesne 2404: 2397: 2210: 2191: 1830:Extended content 1826: 1804: 1800:in my opinion. 1515:Age of Discovery 1205:Giovanni Arrighi 1151: 1132: 685:Giovanni Arrighi 591:Rise of the West 316:Joseph M. Bryant 251: 228: 196: 195: 181: 129: 111: 88:Ricardo Duchesne 68:Ricardo Duchesne 54: 34: 4220: 4219: 4215: 4214: 4213: 4211: 4210: 4209: 4208: 4202:deletion review 4195: 3935:I agree 100%.-- 3906: 3725: 3711: 3707: 3705:Arbitrary break 3492: 3414: 3205:reply by Morris 3041: 2916: 2896: 2751: 2587: 2444:The Global City 2415: 2400: 2393: 2385:procedural keep 2345:Darkness Shines 2192: 2161:procedural keep 2068:Arjun Appadurai 1994: 1989: 1831: 1823: 1614:Randall Collins 1507:early modernity 1262: 1193:Randall Collins 1133: 1094:and many more. 1017: 867:WP:Battleground 843:User:BlueonGray 839: 836:WP:Battleground 777:WP:battleground 673:Randall Collins 585:The history of 535:WP:battleground 465:WP:battleground 138: 102: 86: 83: 71: 50: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4218: 4216: 4207: 4206: 4190: 4189: 4171: 4170: 4169: 4168: 4167: 4166: 4165: 4164: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4059: 4058: 4057: 4056: 4055: 4054: 4053: 4009: 4008: 4007: 4006: 4005: 4004: 3994:David Eppstein 3976: 3962: 3947: 3930: 3929: 3905: 3902: 3901: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3878: 3877: 3859: 3858: 3857: 3856: 3855: 3854: 3808: 3807: 3786: 3765: 3739: 3738: 3737: 3727:Alpha Quadrant 3720: 3719: 3708: 3706: 3703: 3702: 3701: 3700: 3699: 3698: 3697: 3696: 3695: 3694: 3693: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3648: 3647: 3646: 3645: 3644: 3643: 3642: 3641: 3640: 3639: 3638: 3637: 3636: 3590: 3589: 3588: 3587: 3586: 3585: 3584: 3583: 3582: 3581: 3545: 3521: 3491: 3488: 3487: 3486: 3485: 3484: 3469: 3455:David Eppstein 3413: 3412:Press coverage 3410: 3409: 3408: 3368: 3367: 3360: 3357: 3346: 3345: 3344: 3343: 3342: 3341: 3309:Printing Press 3279:an attack page 3272: 3271: 3270: 3269: 3247: 3246: 3228: 3227: 3193: 3186: 3185: 3184: 3183: 3182: 3138: 3137: 3136: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3040: 3037: 3005: 3004: 2963: 2962: 2961: 2960: 2921:comment added 2895: 2892: 2891: 2890: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2886: 2860: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2822: 2821: 2820: 2750: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2744: 2743: 2725: 2724: 2687: 2670: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2606: 2605: 2604: 2603: 2600: 2586: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2563: 2535: 2534: 2491: 2464:cited 12 times 2414: 2411: 2410: 2409: 2381: 2380: 2379: 2378: 2356: 2355: 2335: 2334: 2333: 2332: 2303: 2302: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2250: 2249: 2248: 2247: 2224: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2149: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2094: 2093: 2092: 2091: 2090: 2064:Amitai Etzioni 2013: 2012: 1993: 1990: 1986: 1985: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1889: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1880: 1868: 1867: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1833: 1832: 1829: 1824: 1822: 1819: 1817: 1815: 1814: 1790: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1785: 1743: 1742: 1732:David Eppstein 1720: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1684: 1683: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1632: 1610:Google Scholar 1603: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1564: 1563: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1518: 1502: 1474: 1473: 1458: 1455: 1452: 1449: 1446: 1439: 1436: 1433: 1427: 1424: 1421: 1418: 1415: 1412: 1402: 1399:Robert Brenner 1396: 1393: 1390: 1387: 1384: 1381: 1377: 1374: 1370: 1369: 1367: 1363: 1362: 1359: 1351: 1341: 1334:Jack Goldstone 1331: 1320: 1319: 1317: 1313: 1312: 1293: 1286:Robert Brenner 1282:Jack Goldstone 1261: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1088:Jack Goldstone 1070: 1069: 1016: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1004: 1003: 1002: 978: 977: 976: 975: 974: 973: 972: 971: 957: 956: 955: 954: 953: 952: 951: 950: 939: 938: 937: 936: 935: 934: 838: 833: 832: 831: 830: 829: 828: 827: 826: 825: 824: 823: 822: 821: 820: 819: 818: 817: 719: 718: 717: 716: 715: 714: 713: 712: 711: 509: 508: 507: 506: 505: 504: 503: 502: 432: 431: 412: 411: 388: 387: 386: 385: 384: 383: 382: 381: 380: 379: 308:Jack Goldstone 289: 288: 266: 265: 242: 199: 198: 135: 82: 81: 80: 72: 70: 65: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4217: 4205: 4203: 4198: 4192: 4191: 4188: 4184: 4180: 4176: 4173: 4172: 4162: 4158: 4154: 4150: 4149: 4148: 4145: 4143: 4141: 4138: 4134: 4133: 4132: 4128: 4124: 4123:Gun Powder Ma 4119: 4116: 4112: 4108: 4104: 4100: 4096: 4092: 4091: 4090: 4087: 4085: 4083: 4080: 4076: 4075: 4073: 4069: 4065: 4060: 4052: 4048: 4044: 4043:Gun Powder Ma 4039: 4038: 4037: 4036: 4035: 4034: 4033: 4032: 4031: 4027: 4023: 4018: 4014: 4003: 3999: 3995: 3991: 3990: 3989: 3985: 3981: 3980:Gun Powder Ma 3977: 3975: 3971: 3967: 3963: 3960: 3956: 3952: 3948: 3946: 3942: 3938: 3934: 3933: 3932: 3931: 3928: 3924: 3920: 3916: 3915:Gun Powder Ma 3912: 3908: 3907: 3904:A way forward 3903: 3897: 3893: 3889: 3888:Gun Powder Ma 3885: 3882: 3881: 3880: 3879: 3876: 3872: 3868: 3864: 3861: 3860: 3853: 3849: 3845: 3841: 3840: 3839: 3835: 3831: 3830:Gun Powder Ma 3827: 3823: 3819: 3815: 3812: 3811: 3810: 3809: 3806: 3802: 3798: 3794: 3790: 3787: 3785: 3781: 3777: 3773: 3769: 3766: 3764: 3760: 3756: 3752: 3748: 3744: 3741: 3740: 3735: 3732: 3730: 3728: 3721: 3717: 3715: 3710: 3709: 3704: 3692: 3688: 3684: 3683: 3677: 3676: 3675: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3671: 3670: 3668: 3664: 3660: 3656: 3653: 3652: 3635: 3631: 3627: 3626:Gun Powder Ma 3623: 3619: 3618: 3617: 3613: 3609: 3608:Gun Powder Ma 3604: 3603: 3602: 3601: 3600: 3599: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3591: 3580: 3576: 3572: 3571: 3565: 3564: 3563: 3562: 3561: 3560: 3559: 3558: 3557: 3553: 3549: 3548:Gun Powder Ma 3543: 3542: 3536: 3531: 3530: 3525: 3522: 3519: 3515: 3511: 3510: 3505: 3504: 3503: 3500: 3497: 3489: 3483: 3479: 3475: 3474:Gun Powder Ma 3470: 3466: 3465: 3464: 3460: 3456: 3452: 3448: 3444: 3443: 3442: 3441: 3437: 3433: 3432:Gun Powder Ma 3429: 3428: 3427:National Post 3423: 3419: 3411: 3407: 3403: 3399: 3398:Gun Powder Ma 3395: 3391: 3388: 3387: 3386: 3385: 3381: 3377: 3373: 3365: 3361: 3358: 3355: 3354: 3353: 3351: 3340: 3336: 3332: 3328: 3327: 3326: 3322: 3318: 3314: 3310: 3306: 3302: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3294: 3293: 3292: 3288: 3284: 3283:Gun Powder Ma 3280: 3276: 3268: 3264: 3260: 3256: 3251: 3250: 3249: 3248: 3245: 3241: 3237: 3233: 3230: 3229: 3226: 3222: 3218: 3217:Gun Powder Ma 3214: 3210: 3206: 3202: 3198: 3194: 3191: 3190:Tonia Andrade 3187: 3181: 3177: 3173: 3172:Gun Powder Ma 3170: 3166: 3161: 3160: 3159: 3155: 3151: 3147: 3143: 3139: 3135: 3131: 3127: 3126:Gun Powder Ma 3123: 3120: 3119: 3118: 3114: 3110: 3105: 3100: 3096: 3092: 3088: 3087: 3086: 3085: 3084: 3083: 3082: 3081: 3077: 3073: 3072:Gun Powder Ma 3070: 3066: 3062: 3058: 3054: 3050: 3046: 3036: 3035: 3031: 3027: 3026:Gun Powder Ma 3023: 3019: 3015: 3011: 3003: 3000: 2998: 2996: 2993: 2989: 2985: 2984: 2983: 2979: 2975: 2971: 2967: 2966:WP:EVERYTHING 2959: 2955: 2951: 2947: 2946:WP:EVERYTHING 2943: 2939: 2935: 2931: 2930: 2929: 2928: 2927: 2924: 2920: 2914: 2910: 2904: 2900: 2893: 2885: 2881: 2877: 2873: 2869: 2865: 2861: 2859: 2855: 2851: 2850:Gun Powder Ma 2847: 2846: 2845: 2841: 2837: 2833: 2829: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2819: 2815: 2811: 2810:Gun Powder Ma 2806: 2805: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2798: 2794: 2793: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2780: 2776: 2772: 2767: 2763: 2759: 2758: 2748: 2742: 2738: 2734: 2733:Gun Powder Ma 2729: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2723: 2719: 2715: 2711: 2707: 2703: 2699: 2695: 2691: 2688: 2686: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2671: 2669: 2665: 2661: 2657: 2653: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2643: 2639: 2635: 2625: 2623: 2618:world history 2617: 2616:The field of 2614: 2613: 2612: 2611: 2610: 2601: 2598: 2597: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2592: 2584: 2576: 2572: 2568: 2564: 2561: 2557: 2553: 2549: 2545: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2536: 2533: 2529: 2525: 2524:Gun Powder Ma 2521: 2517: 2513: 2509: 2505: 2501: 2497: 2492: 2488: 2487:world history 2484: 2483:Charles Tilly 2480: 2479: 2478: 2477: 2473: 2469: 2465: 2461: 2457: 2454:, whose book 2453: 2452:Charles Tilly 2449: 2445: 2442:, whose book 2441: 2440:Saskia Sassen 2436: 2432: 2428: 2425:is therefore 2424: 2420: 2417:The entry on 2412: 2408: 2405: 2403: 2398: 2396: 2390: 2386: 2383: 2382: 2377: 2373: 2369: 2365: 2360: 2359: 2358: 2357: 2354: 2350: 2346: 2343: 2340: 2337: 2336: 2331: 2327: 2323: 2322:Gun Powder Ma 2319: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2306: 2305: 2304: 2300: 2296: 2292: 2289: 2286: 2283: 2282: 2273: 2269: 2265: 2264: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2254: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2246: 2242: 2238: 2234: 2230: 2225: 2223: 2219: 2215: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2196: 2189: 2185: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2168: 2165: 2162: 2159: 2158: 2144: 2140: 2136: 2132: 2128: 2127: 2126: 2122: 2118: 2117:Gun Powder Ma 2114: 2113: 2111: 2107: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2089: 2085: 2081: 2077: 2073: 2069: 2065: 2061: 2057: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2044: 2040: 2039:Gun Powder Ma 2036: 2032: 2031: 2029: 2025: 2021: 2017: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2011: 2007: 2003: 1999: 1996: 1995: 1991: 1984: 1983: 1979: 1975: 1971: 1956: 1952: 1948: 1944: 1940: 1937: 1936: 1935: 1934: 1933: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1929: 1928: 1917: 1915: 1913: 1911: 1909: 1907: 1905: 1903: 1901: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1858: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1843: 1838: 1835: 1834: 1828: 1827: 1820: 1818: 1813: 1808: 1803: 1799: 1795: 1792: 1791: 1784: 1780: 1776: 1772: 1768: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1758: 1754: 1753:Gun Powder Ma 1750: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1729: 1725: 1722: 1721: 1716: 1712: 1708: 1707:Gun Powder Ma 1704: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1681: 1677: 1673: 1669: 1665: 1661: 1658: 1657: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1636: 1633: 1631: 1627: 1623: 1619: 1618:Charles Tilly 1615: 1611: 1607: 1604: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1585: 1584: 1582: 1578: 1574: 1570: 1569: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1562: 1559: 1557: 1555: 1552: 1548: 1545: 1544: 1535: 1531: 1527: 1526:Gun Powder Ma 1523: 1519: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1503: 1499: 1495: 1494: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1476: 1475: 1472: 1468: 1464: 1463:Gun Powder Ma 1459: 1456: 1453: 1450: 1447: 1444: 1440: 1437: 1434: 1431: 1430:Robert Finley 1428: 1425: 1422: 1419: 1416: 1413: 1410: 1406: 1403: 1400: 1397: 1394: 1391: 1388: 1385: 1382: 1378: 1375: 1372: 1371: 1368: 1365: 1364: 1360: 1357: 1352: 1349: 1345: 1342: 1339: 1335: 1332: 1329: 1325: 1322: 1321: 1318: 1315: 1314: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1298: 1294: 1291: 1290:Robert Finley 1287: 1283: 1279: 1275: 1271: 1270: 1269: 1266: 1259: 1255: 1251: 1247: 1243: 1238: 1233: 1230: 1229: 1218: 1214: 1210: 1206: 1202: 1198: 1197:Charles Tilly 1194: 1190: 1189:Theda Skocpol 1186: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1175: 1171: 1170:Gun Powder Ma 1166: 1165: 1164: 1160: 1156: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1130: 1129:World History 1126: 1122: 1118: 1117:World History 1114: 1113:World History 1110: 1107: 1106: 1105: 1101: 1097: 1096:Gun Powder Ma 1093: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1077: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1056: 1052: 1048: 1044: 1040: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1030: 1026: 1025:Gun Powder Ma 1022: 1015: 1012:Citation and 1011: 1001: 997: 993: 990: 986: 985: 984: 983: 982: 981: 980: 979: 969: 965: 964: 963: 962: 961: 960: 959: 958: 947: 946: 945: 944: 943: 942: 941: 940: 933: 929: 925: 920: 919: 918: 914: 910: 909:Gun Powder Ma 906: 902: 901: 900: 896: 892: 887: 886: 885: 884: 880: 876: 875:Gun Powder Ma 872: 868: 864: 860: 856: 852: 848: 844: 837: 834: 816: 812: 808: 804: 800: 799: 798: 794: 790: 789:Gun Powder Ma 786: 782: 778: 774: 770: 769: 768: 764: 760: 756: 755: 754: 750: 746: 745:Gun Powder Ma 742: 738: 737: 736: 732: 728: 724: 720: 710: 706: 702: 698: 694: 693:World History 690: 686: 682: 681:Theda Skocpol 678: 674: 670: 669:Charles Tilly 666: 662: 661:World History 658: 655: 654: 653: 649: 645: 644:Gun Powder Ma 641: 637: 633: 629: 628: 627: 623: 619: 614: 613: 612: 608: 604: 603:Gun Powder Ma 600: 596: 592: 588: 584: 583: 582: 578: 574: 570: 566: 565: 564: 560: 556: 555:Gun Powder Ma 552: 548: 544: 540: 536: 532: 531: 530: 526: 522: 518: 513: 512: 511: 510: 501: 497: 493: 489: 484: 483: 482: 478: 474: 473:Gun Powder Ma 470: 466: 462: 458: 454: 453: 452: 448: 444: 440: 436: 435: 434: 433: 430: 426: 422: 421:Gun Powder Ma 418: 414: 413: 409: 405: 401: 397: 396:WP:Notability 393: 390: 389: 378: 374: 370: 365: 364: 363: 359: 355: 354:Gun Powder Ma 350: 349: 348: 344: 340: 335: 334: 333: 329: 325: 324:Gun Powder Ma 321: 317: 313: 312:Tonio Andrade 309: 305: 301: 297: 293: 292: 291: 290: 287: 283: 279: 275: 271: 268: 267: 263: 259: 255: 248: 243: 240: 236: 232: 225: 220: 219: 218: 217: 213: 209: 204: 194: 190: 187: 184: 180: 176: 172: 169: 166: 163: 160: 157: 154: 151: 148: 144: 141: 140:Find sources: 136: 133: 127: 123: 119: 115: 110: 106: 101: 97: 93: 89: 85: 84: 79: 76: 69: 66: 64: 63: 60: 59: 55: 53: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 4196: 4193: 4174: 4117: 4098: 3919:Phil Bridger 3883: 3867:Francis Bond 3862: 3813: 3788: 3767: 3746: 3742: 3726: 3712: 3680: 3654: 3568: 3540: 3528: 3517: 3507: 3501: 3495: 3493: 3450: 3446: 3425: 3418:WP:Academics 3415: 3389: 3369: 3347: 3274: 3273: 3231: 3168: 3145: 3141: 3121: 3068: 3061:JA Goldstone 3042: 3013: 3006: 2964:Please read 2938:WP:109PAPERS 2905: 2901: 2897: 2867: 2831: 2790: 2770: 2765: 2755: 2752: 2709: 2701: 2689: 2672: 2651: 2634:demonstrated 2633: 2630: 2621: 2619: 2615: 2607: 2588: 2547: 2495: 2486: 2455: 2443: 2416: 2402:(Discussion) 2401: 2394: 2384: 2338: 2284: 2261: 2193:— Preceding 2183: 2160: 2072:Bruno Latour 2055: 2034: 1997: 1967: 1839: 1836: 1816: 1793: 1748: 1723: 1702: 1693: 1689: 1659: 1638: 1634: 1605: 1546: 1522:David Landes 1511:world system 1506: 1405:David Landes 1274:David Landes 1263: 1231: 1134:— Preceding 1108: 1084:Roy Bin Wong 1080:David Landes 1075: 1038: 1018: 870: 858: 840: 688: 656: 639: 468: 460: 391: 319: 304:Roy Bin Wong 300:David Landes 295: 269: 200: 188: 182: 174: 167: 161: 155: 149: 139: 57: 51: 45: 43: 31: 28: 3886:See above. 3539:additional 3201:RD's review 3192:, from 2011 3107:Duchesne?-- 3065:WP:ACADEMIC 2917:—Preceding 2188:WP:ACADEMIC 2166:; see-also 2076:Ulrich Beck 2060:David Bloor 1730:criteria. — 1698:WP:Academic 1694:much higher 1639:exceptional 1513:during the 1265:WP:Academic 1242:This report 1014:WP:ACADEMIC 803:WP:ACADEMIC 723:WP:ACADEMIC 569:WP:ACADEMIC 488:WP:ACADEMIC 439:WP:ACADEMIC 203:WP:ACADEMIC 165:free images 4153:Xxanthippe 4064:Xxanthippe 3951:Xxanthippe 3937:BlueonGray 3911:BlueonGray 3822:March 2011 3659:Xxanthippe 3422:an article 3394:BlueonGray 3376:BlueonGray 3366:of Canada. 3255:WP:SOAPBOX 3197:Ian Morris 3150:BlueonGray 3109:BlueonGray 3091:Xxanthippe 3010:WP:Canvass 2948:for more. 2775:BlueonGray 2773:. Cheers, 2710:notability 2638:BlueonGray 2567:BlueonGray 2548:discipline 2468:BlueonGray 2364:WP:SOAPBOX 2291:Xxanthippe 2214:BlueonGray 2199:BlueonGray 2135:Xxanthippe 2102:Xxanthippe 2080:BlueonGray 2020:Xxanthippe 1943:WP:PEACOCK 1842:WP:PEACOCK 1672:Xxanthippe 1668:WP:Prof#C1 1643:BlueonGray 1622:BlueonGray 1573:Xxanthippe 1237:WP:PEACOCK 1209:BlueonGray 1155:BlueonGray 1140:BlueonGray 1047:WP:PROF#C1 924:BlueonGray 891:BlueonGray 807:BlueonGray 759:BlueonGray 727:BlueonGray 701:BlueonGray 618:BlueonGray 573:BlueonGray 492:BlueonGray 443:BlueonGray 369:BlueonGray 339:BlueonGray 231:Tom Morris 208:BlueonGray 3755:Noleander 3747:secondary 3490:Main work 3049:also here 2970:WP:EFFORT 2706:WP:FRINGE 2702:notoriety 2458:has been 2446:has been 2427:Sociology 2035:much less 1771:Roscelese 1484:Nil Einne 1260:Citations 1109:Question: 922:paltry.-- 869:, namely 657:Question: 589:and the ' 537:). Again 517:Roscelese 274:Roscelese 254:• Gene93k 4118:Comment: 4103:Cerejota 4099:Facepalm 4022:Cerejota 3884:Comment: 3844:Pgallert 3814:Comment: 3797:Pgallert 3714:Relisted 3524:WorldCat 2974:Cerejota 2950:FuFoFuEd 2934:WP:BLP/N 2909:Calogera 2876:FuFoFuEd 2836:Cerejota 2714:Cerejota 2677:FuFoFuEd 2660:FuFoFuEd 2516:February 2237:FuFoFuEd 2207:contribs 2195:unsigned 2131:Athenean 2056:Question 2002:Athenean 1802:Gamaliel 1779:contribs 1344:Bin Wong 1324:Bin Wong 1278:Bin Wong 1148:contribs 1136:unsigned 1076:Comment: 743:is you? 601:for him 599:158 hits 525:contribs 282:contribs 132:View log 52:lifebaka 4179:Auguria 3826:canvass 3772:WP:PROF 3751:WP:PROF 3655:Comment 3390:Comment 3331:DÜNGÁNÈ 3317:DÜNGÁNÈ 3275:Comment 3259:DÜNGÁNÈ 3236:Carrite 3122:Comment 3057:RB Wong 2919:undated 2694:WP:PROF 2673:Comment 2656:Eurabia 2552:WP:PROF 2544:WP:PROF 2435:WP:PROF 2368:DÜNGÁNÈ 2285:Comment 2184:Comment 2098:h-index 1947:DÜNGÁNÈ 1749:Comment 1728:WP:PROF 1690:Comment 1664:h index 1635:Comment 1606:Comment 1589:DÜNGÁNÈ 1380:(1993). 1246:DÜNGÁNÈ 1055:WP:PROF 1051:WP:PROF 1043:h-index 992:DÜNGÁNÈ 775:with a 171:WP refs 159:scholar 105:protect 100:history 4175:Delete 4013:WP:DRV 3863:Delete 3789:Delete 3768:Delete 3743:Delete 3453:him. — 3311:, and 3016:) the 2771:Delete 2698:WP:GNG 2692:Fails 2690:Delete 2652:Delete 2504:WP:COI 2310:WP:COI 2074:, and 1970:WP:COI 1794:Delete 1724:Delete 1660:Delete 1232:Delete 1203:, and 1168:low. 1039:Delete 905:WP:BLP 595:Scirus 270:Delete 143:Google 109:delete 46:delete 3687:talk 3575:talk 3509:Brill 3451:about 2864:BRILL 2832:might 2797:talk 2520:March 2395:Bduke 2268:talk 2233:BLP/N 1587:them. 1309:Brill 1059:Nsk92 845:is a 457:Brill 186:JSTOR 147:books 126:views 118:watch 114:links 16:< 4183:talk 4157:talk 4127:talk 4107:talk 4068:talk 4047:talk 4026:talk 3998:talk 3984:talk 3970:talk 3955:talk 3941:talk 3923:talk 3913:and 3892:talk 3871:talk 3848:talk 3834:talk 3801:talk 3780:talk 3759:talk 3753:. -- 3663:talk 3630:talk 3612:talk 3552:talk 3514:here 3478:talk 3459:talk 3436:talk 3402:talk 3380:talk 3335:talk 3321:talk 3287:talk 3263:talk 3240:talk 3232:Keep 3221:talk 3203:and 3176:talk 3154:talk 3130:talk 3113:talk 3095:talk 3076:talk 3059:and 3030:talk 2978:talk 2968:and 2954:talk 2913:talk 2880:talk 2872:here 2854:talk 2840:talk 2814:talk 2779:talk 2737:talk 2718:talk 2681:talk 2664:talk 2642:talk 2571:talk 2528:talk 2490:has. 2472:talk 2372:talk 2349:talk 2339:Keep 2326:talk 2295:talk 2241:talk 2218:talk 2203:talk 2175:talk 2139:talk 2121:talk 2106:talk 2084:talk 2043:talk 2024:talk 2006:talk 1998:Keep 1978:talk 1951:talk 1807:talk 1775:talk 1757:talk 1736:talk 1711:talk 1676:talk 1647:talk 1626:talk 1593:talk 1577:talk 1547:Keep 1530:talk 1488:talk 1467:talk 1250:talk 1213:talk 1174:talk 1159:talk 1144:talk 1100:talk 1063:talk 1029:talk 996:talk 987:see 928:talk 913:talk 895:talk 879:talk 811:talk 793:talk 763:talk 749:talk 731:talk 705:talk 689:none 648:talk 622:talk 607:talk 577:talk 559:talk 521:talk 496:talk 477:talk 461:only 447:talk 425:talk 392:Keep 373:talk 358:talk 343:talk 328:talk 278:talk 258:talk 235:talk 212:talk 179:FENS 153:news 122:logs 96:talk 92:edit 3682:DGG 3570:DGG 3211:or 2990:. 2915:) 2868:any 2792:DGG 2766:one 2624:... 2522:). 2506:as 2496:not 2438:is 2263:DGG 1616:or 695:or 640:not 320:not 193:TWL 130:– ( 4185:) 4159:) 4129:) 4109:) 4101:-- 4074:. 4070:) 4049:) 4028:) 4000:) 3986:) 3972:) 3957:) 3943:) 3925:) 3894:) 3873:) 3850:) 3836:) 3803:) 3782:) 3761:) 3689:) 3669:. 3665:) 3632:) 3624:. 3614:) 3577:) 3554:) 3480:) 3461:) 3447:by 3438:) 3404:) 3392:: 3382:) 3337:) 3323:) 3307:, 3289:) 3265:) 3257:. 3242:) 3223:) 3199:: 3178:) 3167:: 3156:) 3132:) 3115:) 3097:) 3078:) 3032:) 3024:. 2980:) 2956:) 2907:-- 2882:) 2856:) 2842:) 2816:) 2799:) 2781:) 2739:) 2720:) 2683:) 2666:) 2644:) 2573:) 2530:) 2518:, 2474:) 2374:) 2351:) 2328:) 2320:. 2297:) 2270:) 2243:) 2235:. 2220:) 2212:-- 2205:• 2177:) 2141:) 2123:) 2112:. 2108:) 2086:) 2070:, 2066:, 2062:, 2045:) 2030:. 2026:) 2008:) 1980:) 1953:) 1781:) 1777:⋅ 1759:) 1738:) 1713:) 1703:is 1678:) 1649:) 1628:) 1595:) 1583:. 1579:) 1532:) 1490:) 1469:) 1303:, 1299:, 1288:, 1280:, 1252:) 1215:) 1199:, 1195:, 1191:, 1187:, 1176:) 1161:) 1153:-- 1146:• 1115:? 1102:) 1086:, 1065:) 1057:. 1031:) 998:) 930:) 915:) 897:) 881:) 873:. 813:) 795:) 765:) 751:) 733:) 707:) 663:? 650:) 624:) 609:) 579:) 561:) 549:, 545:, 539:RD 527:) 523:⋅ 498:) 479:) 467:: 449:) 427:) 375:) 360:) 345:) 330:) 314:, 310:, 284:) 280:⋅ 260:) 252:— 249:. 237:) 226:. 214:) 173:) 124:| 120:| 116:| 112:| 107:| 103:| 98:| 94:| 58:++ 4181:( 4163:. 4155:( 4140:E 4137:Y 4125:( 4105:( 4082:E 4079:Y 4066:( 4045:( 4024:( 3996:( 3982:( 3968:( 3961:. 3953:( 3939:( 3921:( 3890:( 3869:( 3846:( 3832:( 3799:( 3778:( 3757:( 3685:( 3661:( 3628:( 3610:( 3573:( 3550:( 3476:( 3457:( 3434:( 3400:( 3378:( 3333:( 3319:( 3285:( 3261:( 3238:( 3219:( 3174:( 3152:( 3128:( 3111:( 3101:. 3093:( 3074:( 3047:( 3028:( 3012:( 2995:E 2992:Y 2976:( 2952:( 2925:. 2911:( 2878:( 2852:( 2838:( 2812:( 2795:( 2777:( 2735:( 2716:( 2679:( 2662:( 2640:( 2569:( 2526:( 2470:( 2370:( 2347:( 2324:( 2301:. 2293:( 2266:( 2239:( 2216:( 2201:( 2173:( 2145:. 2137:( 2119:( 2104:( 2082:( 2041:( 2022:( 2004:( 1976:( 1949:( 1809:) 1805:( 1773:( 1769:– 1755:( 1734:( 1709:( 1682:. 1674:( 1645:( 1624:( 1591:( 1575:( 1554:E 1551:Y 1528:( 1517:. 1486:( 1465:( 1248:( 1211:( 1172:( 1157:( 1142:( 1098:( 1061:( 1027:( 994:( 926:( 911:( 893:( 877:( 809:( 791:( 761:( 747:( 729:( 703:( 646:( 620:( 605:( 575:( 557:( 519:( 494:( 475:( 445:( 423:( 371:( 356:( 341:( 326:( 276:( 256:( 233:( 229:— 210:( 197:) 189:· 183:· 175:· 168:· 162:· 156:· 150:· 145:( 137:( 134:) 128:) 90:(

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

Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Ricardo Duchesne - Knowledge (XXG)

Index