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 delete‎. ✗plicit 14:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jana Jones (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

WP:notability, Wikipedia:Notability (academics) Fails notability criteria, WP:notability and Notability for academics criteria Wikipedia:Notability (academics) She was never a professor and the number of citations arising from her PhD is small. Anubus13 (talk) 09:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 August 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:00, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep What is the evidence that she was not notable? static shakedown ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ 11:33, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. This appears to be a case of WP:BIO1E. Her "Evidence for prehistoric origins of Egyptian mummification in late Neolithic burials" (first of five authors) has 107 citations on Google Scholar, which may be high for Egyptology (I'm not sure), and appears to be the basis for all the mainstream-media coverage in our article. I don't think we can base WP:PROF#C1 on a single work, and the rest of her publications are not as well cited. I cannot even verify the basic biographical milestones listed in our article (degrees, employment as a research fellow, and date of death). There's a more colorful biography than ours at [1] but equally unverifiable and I think not really usable as a source. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The book on Helwan excavations of which she is co-author is also cited 44 times, and "Excavations at Hierakonpolis" 39 times. static shakedown ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ 21:23, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete She meets neither the notability guidelines nor the notability for academics guidelines. MargaretRDonald (talk) 22:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you familiar with the field of Egyptology ? Again I ask what makes her not notable? According to notability guidelines: A person is notable if

• The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times; or
• The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field; or
• The person has an entry in a country's standard national biographical dictionary (e.g. the Dictionary of National Biography).

Her contribution to textile analysis from ancient Egypt is widely cited and widely known in the field. Her most famous work was shortlisted for a 2015 Times Higher Education Award as mentioned here. static shakedown ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ 17:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The question is whether she is notable (ie, it requires a proof of a positive case for notability). And in terms of these specific points:

1. She has not received a well known or significant honour or been nominated for one several times. A single shortlisting for an award which is, with respect, not a particularly significant honour cannot satisfy this criterion.

2. Her contribution is not widely recognised. She has done no more than most other PhD and single contributing authors. I have several family members with PhDs and academic publications who have exponentially citations than her and are not in Wikipedia. 107 citations of her Phd, 44 for a co-authored book and 39 for one article is not something which, by itself, is objectively capable of being considered "wide". Unless some verifiable identified expert and notable person in the field gives such an opinion despite her limited contribution and citations, this criterion cannot be met.

3. She does not have an entry in any country's standard national biographical dictionary. Again, this criterion is not met. Anubus13 (talk) 08:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete agree with the above. Not notable. Bduke (talk) 22:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I've added some sources and removed unsourced material. Their work is in a very very very niche area but they appear to be quite prolific and important. There was sustained media attention on her work in the 2010's. Dr vulpes (Talk) 05:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. The key work undertaken is not prolific. It is a single Phd.

  2. That work gained some attention at the time but did not win any award.

  3. Referencing a regional Australian newspaper, the Newcastle Herald, is not proof of expertise. Anubus13 (talk) 22:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Dr vulpes has improved the article but I'm still not seeing a pass of WP:NPROF here. The sustained media attention on her work is work done by a group of collaborators, not her alone (and I'm not convinced it's enough even if it were her alone). Can anyone find her obituary? How do we know she's died? -- asilvering (talk) 02:09, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  She was listed in the Ryerson Index - ryersonindex.org Anubus13 (talk) 07:18, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Could you provide a link, please? -- asilvering (talk) 07:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  https://ryersonindex.org/search.php

  this is what appears for search terms Jana Jones and dates 2023 to 2023:

  Surname Given Names Notice Type Date Event Age Other Details Publication Published

  JONES Jana Marie Probate notice 28JUN2023 Death late of Elizabeth Bay NSW Probate Index 18SEP2023 Anubus13 (talk) 07:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh, so not even an obituary. Well, that doesn't help us find any notability, then. -- asilvering (talk) 17:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I think for a recently deceased person this sort of record falls under the prohibition in WP:BLPPRIMARY. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, I wasn't so much looking for a source for the info to cite as hoping that there was some coverage on her we hadn't found, that had silently been used as the source for the 2023 death date. But if it's just a probate record, no luck there. -- asilvering (talk) 19:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Does not pass WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:12, 29 August 2024 (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.