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. Stifle (talk) 15:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rosemary Owens (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

I could not find anything that would make this person notable. The first thirty Google results according to Scroogle show no reliable sources that would establish notability – the sort of links I found were Google Groups, an online petition calling for her to step down, WordPress and other blogs, official sites, etc. A position of "dean" does not qualify under WP:PROF. hbdragon88 (talk) 23:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep There are deans and deans. The Dean of a law school, as head of a school that ordinarily justifies a separate Wikipedia entry for the school, as usual for law schools and medical schools and major business schools, is notable, and usually goes to those who are already distinguished faculty--as is her case --she was previously Professor of Law at Adelaide, which would normally be notable regardless of further positions. (The usual position of Dean as subordinate within a college is another matter, and such people have not necessarily been full professors first). In her case, I would expect notability as a professor and probably lawyer as well. since when do we limit RSs to those in the first 30 hits of a google search? That's even worse than limiting sources to those found in a gsearch. As for notability under WP:PROF, she is co-author of The Law of Work (Oxford University Press, Melbourne, 2007), a major treatise by a top-ranking publisher, co-ed of Intention in Law and Philosophy, (Ashgate Dartmouth, Aldershot UK, 2001), and co-ed of Sexing The Subject Of Law, Sweet and Maxwell Ltd, London UK, and LBC Information Services, Sydney Australia, 1997, and 11 book chapters listed on her CV. G Scholar finds additionally (as Rosemary J Owens) at least 6 more papers. I think a major law school appointing her as its head amounts to recognition of professional notability. DGG (talk) 05:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't say that we should delete this just based on my survey, but as a disclaimer as to tell everyone the sort of search that I did. hbdragon88 (talk) 07:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In addition, I denied a speedy on that reason - I thought that a dean of a law school did meet PROF 6 on my intiial reading, and then OrangeMike pointed something out, I reread the notes at the bottom of the guideline and saw the words "dean, provost" and reached the same conclusion as OM that this did not pass the stated criteria. hbdragon88 (talk) 07:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. I agree, and further point out that she is not even the Dean, she is the Acting Dean. There is a big difference. The Acting Dean is someone who takes on the Dean’s responsibilities temporarily, until the Dean is available to fulfill the responsibilities. Because of travel, vacation, leaves etc., many people who would not (perhaps never) be appointed as Dean (e.g., an Assistant Dean) spend some time as Acting Dean.--Eric Yurken (talk) 15:38, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• keep probably should be speedy keep. notability is not questionable, and that the article needs improvement is not a reason to delete.---Buridan (talk) 21:21, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Apparently she is the Acting Dean of the University of Adelaide Law School, not the Dean. There seems to be only a few news items mentioning her, and in a minor way. Her list of pubs on her web site lists three edited books. She does not seem to be the first editor in any of them, except for one (just published by Oxford U. Press). The most widely held of her edited books (Intention in law and philosophy; for which she is the second editor) is in 178 libraries worldwide according to WorldCat; I think a more acceptable threshold for notability is 300 for WorldCat holdings.--Eric Yurken (talk) 23:58, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 03:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• keep - Sufficiently notable, as detailed well in the comment by DGG. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 08:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The summary gave no sources - just oppiions that don't seem to correlate with WP:PROF. Writing papers is not part of WP:PROF, unless they have reliable sources discussing their importance, and nor is being appointed to an administrative position.

• Delete I guess Dean doesn't pass the "The person has held a major highest-level elected or appointed academic post at an academic institution or major academic society." part of WP:PROF, as it is an admin position, not acedemic. She doesn't seem to pass any others wither (RS saying she has significant impact / awards).Yobmod (talk) 12:03, 4 December 2008 (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.