Talk:John Steckley

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John Steckley article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

This article was nominated for deletion on 19 March 2009. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Indigenous peoples of North America

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Canada Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Seems pretty notable, but what do I know...[edit]

I don't know anything about this subject at all, but he sounds pretty significant to me. Couldn't find a link to discussion for deletion, but I was curious so I had a quick Google (filtering out all the book websites) and found plenty of stuff about him. It seems obvious that to a student of the Huron people and of Native American culture & dialects in general, he's probably pretty notable. I've added the "Indigenous peoples of North America" wikiproject link as it seemed pretty relevant. Now I'd better get back to wondering how the heck a British fashion history cove like me managed to end up here... Mabalu (talk) 11:06, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a WP:PROD delete, basically saying as the article currently stands it's not showing any reason for notability. You can "If you can address this concern by improving, copyediting, sourcing, renaming or merging the page" as the header says. If you found any reliable secondary sources to establish his notability, rewards, published papers in established journals, etc.. then those references can be used to improve the article and establish notability. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 11:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the explanation. I decided to add in some of the stuff I found while Googling, and also had a stab at tidying the look of the article a bit, although I feel a bit of a fraud as it is SO outside my usual fields. (Must be mad!) I did find references to academic reviews/refs of his work in journals and academic publications eg [1] [2] but someone with access to those would have to look those up. For now, I don't think there's very much more I can add. Mabalu (talk) 12:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So long as those fall within the criteria of a peer reviewed journal, I suppose. The second link looks a bit shady although it's at a .edu. Thought for a second I time warped back to 1997. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 13:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The final decision will come down too whether or not he meets the criteria listed here: Wikipedia:Notability_(academics) — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 13:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those two references are "book reviews." I'm not sure this would constitute enough for criteria #1 for academic notability, and I don't think it would apply under the other conditions either. Without reading those reviews it's hard to say. I also know nothing about this field of science, myself, so I have no idea what the "major" journals are for it are. So far I haven't seen anything that makes me think hes anymore notable then the thousands of other college professors out there. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 13:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nor do I, apart from the Huron language thing, which does sound pretty major. My guess would be that he deserves a paragraph under the page for that language, if that's all he is really known for. Mabalu (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we have/had an article for the Huron language he would be mentionable there, but that alone doesn't grant him enough notability for his own page, I think. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 23:36, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which apparently we do, and he is mentioned on it. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 23:36, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography[edit]

A source needs found for a Bibliography, just a list of things without any references or idea what they are (books, papers, whatever), won't do. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 04:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Steckley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:17, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]