Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ListasBot (talk | contribs) at 09:44, 9 April 2010 (Applied fixes to WPBiography template. Did I get it wrong?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Biography: Science and Academia Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Can somebody justify why there is a Misplaced Pages page devoted to an assistant professor of political science who has yet to land a tenured faculty position? There are HUNDREDS of assistant professors in political science who have published articles and univeristy press books in their respective fields. There should be some compelling reason why Dr. Bloom's career and work merits special attention on Misplaced Pages. Otherwise, mark for deletion--seems suspiciously like self-advertising. Every assistant professor in political science, or in any academic field, cannot have their own Misplaced Pages page. That's what www.MYNAME.com domain registration is for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.14.179 (talk • contribs)

I wrote the original article. If by "self-advertising" you mean that I am Mia Bloom: no I'm not. I agree with the assertion that an assistant professor is not notable. Mia Bloom wrote a book that perhaps deserves its own article and that made her notable too. ←Humus sapiens 19:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

i agree w/ first user. humus sapiens you bring up an excellent point--the book deserves its own article which means, by default, the prof is notable. BUT--there is no information provided regarding why this book deserves its own article. i assume that lots of assistant professors at lots of universities write books for tenure purposes. i also assume that, in following wiki policy, those that deserve their own pages are notable. so how do we know, as an uninformed audience, either the book or professor is notable?

following policies that other wiki debates have spawned, i'd like to see footnotes citing the importance of the book in terms of its reception, proof that the author is a "leading expert" as claimed in the text, and other evidence that makes this entry 'notable.' i think this is a perfectly fair comment by a non-specialist reader who has not heard of this woman in typical online or TV or radio chats or discussions or debates about suicide terrorism, but would be readily convinced if some hard evidence verified she is a 'leading expert'. and can we not cite book jackets or amazon.com reviews here?  :-( bad experiences with those on wiki. in other words, there is some concern for neutrality and objectivity here.

if no hard external proof can be given, then i agree w/ OP--mark for deletion. and i think the standards of evidence here can be amicably conceded as standard verification policy--something i know humus sapiens would understand as a wiki administrator. 03:08, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

The article on the book is not written yet. Feel free to improve this or any other article. If you want to see any article removed, try WP:AFD. ←Humus sapiens 05:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

• Start-Class biography articles
• Start-Class biography (science and academia) articles
• Unknown-importance biography (science and academia) articles
• Science and academia work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles