The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Courcelles 00:13, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oren Ben-Dor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This academic doesn't seem to meet the notability standard for inclusion in Wikipedia. Although he is a published author and a passionate advocate for his views on foreign policy, he has not received substantial coverage from secondary sources and appears to have had little impact beyond his own writings. Scaleshombre (talk) 09:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Scaleshombre (talk) 09:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Unlike many bios this article is fully reference. Also, searches per "Find sources" above show various reliable sources, including references to him and/or his work in google scholar which establish that he has academic credentials. I put some new material into the article, and more could be put in. Some people may not like his views, but lack of notability or references definitely is not the issue. CarolMooreDC (talk) 14:17, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Carol, thank you for responding to my concern about the subject's notability. Although the article is referenced, I'm not sure it presents a valid collection of reliable sources. Most of the refererences are to op-eds by the subject himself in Counterpunch and some other outlets. There is no significant coverage about the subject by other journalists or scholars.

The article mentions that "he has been described as 'the leading Israeli philosopher.'" The source is a column in Ireland's Sunday Business Post. Such praise would certainly qualify him as notable, but only if it reflected a consensus among academics and/or philosophers. The only one who seems to regard Ben-Dor in this light is the column's author. Moreover, Google has no other references to Ben-Dor as an Israeli philosopher of any consequence, let alone leading.

I don't think anyone could disagree that the subject is an interesting person with provocative views on foreign policy. He just doesn't rise to the level of notability for an encyclopedia such as this one. The page should be deleted.Scaleshombre (talk) 18:11, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Six of the 12 references are from WP:RS; the rest from his own articles. Since you admit to being a brand new editor, perhaps you don't understand that even foreign newspapers can be WP:RS. He certainly has enough notability to suggest more can come in the future and this biography is far more referenced than many, including on other academics. (I've suggested a solution to the "leading" issue on the talk page; further discussion there.]] Since today is your second day of editing and you've devoted it entirely to deleting this article, you must realize some might consider you what is called in wikipedia a WP:Single purpose account. CarolMooreDC (talk) 19:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Carol, I agree that foreign sources can be valid WP:RS. I don't think, however, that the sources you cite make a case for his notability. For example, his bio page at University of Southampton, while clearly confirming his employment there, is threadbare. Look at the bio pages for his colleagues. Most of their CVs are more extensive. Even among his own peers, he doesn't stand out. The other sources, not including his op-eds, mention him in passing or quote him briefly about larger subjects. If he is notable, it's in a Zelig or Forest Gumpish way.

What exactly has he accomplished in terms of WP:N? As an attorney, has he done anything newsworthy? As an activist, has he had a discernible impact? The sources you cite don't paint a picture of someone who has been influential in his fields of endeavor. As far as my editing at Wikipedia, you're right that I'm a newbie. This is actually my second article. I did some minor edits to a Playboy TV article earlier this year; while I have a long way to go to qualify as prolific, I can assure you that my interests are eclectic. Take it as a compliment that the article on Ben-Dor caught my eye and inspired me to dig deeper. But having done that, I don't think he merits (at least not yet) an article in Wikipedia. Scaleshombre (talk) 22:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The point is he's got a lot more refs than academics of similar status, some of whom may have totally fabricated credentials, areas of expertise, etc. for all we know. CarolMooreDC (talk) 13:12, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. GS cites are 13, 2, 2, that's all so fails WP:Prof#C1. It is not enough to have published, one must have been noted. Too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks. I wasn't aware of that page. Now know what to do with some academic pages I had questions about, like Avi Bell. Of course, WP:Prof#C1 says that Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline still applies.CarolMooreDC (talk) 01:58, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Writes a lot for sure, but only scattered notice taken of him. EEng (talk) 23:15, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable as academic and as author. There are reviews of his books in good academic sources, including Butler, B. E. 2002. "Oren Ben-Dor, Constitutional Limits and the Public Sphere". Philosophy in Review. 22: 92-94., Harrison, R. 2003. "Oren Ben-Dor, Constitutional Limits and the Public Sphere: A Critical Study of Bentham's Constitutionalism". Utilitas. 15: 255-257, Webb, Julian. 2009. "Thinking About Law: In Silence with Heidegger - By Oren Ben-Dor". Legal Studies. 29, no. 2: 341-345. and Wolcher, Louis E. 2009. "Review of Thinking About Law in Silence with Heidegger". The Modern Law Review. 72, no. 6: 1035-1044. (Refs from Worldcat at [1]. Additionally, Google Scholar shows about 150 references to his work [2]. This certainly amounts to ":noted" ,not just "published". DGG ( talk ) 02:50, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After subtracting out his own writings, what's left in the Scholar references is mostly people thanking Ben-Dor (usually along with others) for reading their thesis drafts and helping organize seminars. The two genuine citations I found were one-sentence references in someone's footnotes. Those claiming notability need to list specific refs, not just click on Google and see how many links returned. EEng (talk) 22:23, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DGG did list four specific references. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:11, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 05:48, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - noted academic and noted contributor to the debate on the UK academic boycott of Israeli academia. (Msrasnw (talk) 11:29, 19 December 2010 (UTC))[reply]
• Delete. There is no evidence of high citations or other academic impact needed to pass WP:PROF. And it is entirely self-sourced, ruling out a pass of WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:56, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.