Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arno Tausch (2nd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Spartaz Humbug! 07:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arno Tausch

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Arno Tausch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not seem to be notable. Article is not well sourced. Also he is said to be "one of the founders of quantitative world-systems theory," yet he is not mentioned in its article. (Unless I overlooked his name somewhere.) Jaque Hammer (talk) 10:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note In the previous nomination Wikipedia:Notability (academics) was cited by those advocating keeping the article. Yet the article asserts that Dr. Tausch is an important author and innovator in the field of political science and history, not just a professor. Jaque Hammer (talk) 11:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. —Msrasnw (talk) 12:49, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Msrasnw (talk) 12:49, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Lack of notability. Agreed re: claim "one of the founders of quantitative world-systems theory," yet no mention in that article. SNaismith (talk) 14:50, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: A non-conventional researcher (i.e. does not seem to have a full-time academic post) He is listed at the for Policy Research & Development (IPRD) as Dr. Arno Tausch, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Innsbruck; Ministerial Counsellor in the Department of European and International Affairs at the Ministry for Social Security, Austria with a brief and nicer biography than ours - (perhaps still over lauditory) [1]. He seems to have published many books (see Worldcat for the books and their holdings) and I find there to be a sufficiently strong claim to notability keep based on his publications - books and their holdings and the reviews and the media coverage listed in the article. The article would seem to require trimming and a removal of some of the excesses or appropriate citations adding. The article seems to me to suffer from trying too hard to prove he is highly notable when he might be merely notable. (Msrasnw (talk) 15:31, 20 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]
  • Keep notable as an author, multiple reviewed books, some found widely in libraries (Towards a socio-liberal theory of world development is in 318 WorldCat libraries [1] ).The extensive sections listing reviews and minor references could be converted into footnotes. the rest of the article is already much more concise (thanks to the good editing of Franz Weber and Crusio), than the outrageous version in 2008. About that version, I said "weak keep", with the comment that " in spite of the best efforts of his supporters to exaggerate his importance to impress us, we will be objective and not reject it out of hand as would be a natural reaction, but recognize that he is after all sufficiently notable" (as an author, not an academic) DGG ( talk ) 16:34, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Has written much but has been cited little on GS. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:23, 21 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
To be more specific GS cites are 34, 29, 19, 15, 15, 14, 13, 12, 12, 11, 10 ... to give an h index of 10. By our usual standards this is not enough to satisfy WP:Prof#C1. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete, searching Google Scholar by world system, one finds that there are many papers with stratospheric citation numbers; 6259, 4142, 1354, 1012, 807, 626, 605, 393, 383, 347, 294, 289, 288, 283, 269, 265, 252, 240, 231, 228, 228, 226, 208, 203, 199, 171, 165, 164, 161, 160, 157, 148, 143, 123, 118, 117, 116, 114, 112, 111, 111, 109, 109, 108, 107, 107, 99, 99, 96, 92, 92, 88, 80, 77, 75, 73, 65, 63, 62.... Not a one of these is by Tausch, whose highest citation number is a lowly 33. Abductive (reasoning) 05:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: no reliable indication that he meets WP:BIO or WP:PROF. Lack of third party sourcing (to date) makes it difficult to distinguish inflated puffery (of which there seems to be a great deal) from solid fact. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: From a Muslim perspective, one has to emphasize that

1) the very notable books and essays of this liberal Catholic author are well present around global libraries in a way that can hardly be observed with other European political scientists, found on the English language pages of Wikipedia. Even at the King Fahd Library in Saudi Arabia, you find his massive 'What 1.3 Billion Muslims really think', which counters, like tso many other of his works, the Islamophobia, which is so present in many Western countries. Anyone adviocating the deletion of the entry should go to the OCLC World Catalogue (Worldcat) and compare

2) some of the counter-arguments used above are absolutely irrelevant. Tausch published also and especially in Russia to a very large audience, for example his two essays for the IMEMO-think tank journal 'Mirovaia Ekonomika', which is the Russian 'Foreign Affairs'. I as a Muslim note with pleasure that Tausch's works are also well present in leading journals in Turkey, and dare anyone say that they are not relecant. Global think tank rankings put the IMEMO at one of the top 10 around the globe, and only anglo-saxon arrogance can argue against the global importance of the IMEMO-Institute in Moscow (http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2008/01/09/the_worlds_top_think_tanks)

3) In addition, the Wikipedia statistics for the Tausch articles, now available not only in English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Russian, Polish, Arabic and Farsi show the global interest in the works of this scholar and former diplomat, who also publishes for leading think tanks around the globe (for the statistics in Russian, Arabic and Farsi, the name has to be entered in those languages). The download statistics for the journal 'Revista Entelequia' at the University of Cadiz are impressive indeed. His Entelequia study on the social exclusion of Muslims in Europe is a pioneering work, which enjoys even years after its appearance an enormous popularity in the Internet.

4) The statistical services of Ideas/Repec and the Social Science Research Network in New York show that the number of downloads of : his freely available articles are considerable. In Hungary, where his main economics faculty is situated, he is number 2. The arguments about world systems, used above are irrelevant insofar as the article only claimed that Tausch - in company with scholars like Volker Bornschier, was at the forefront of quantitative dependency and development research in Europe. Read the Dieter Senghaas classic 'Weltwirtschaftsordnung und Entwicklungspolitik', and you realize what I mean

5)Sorry to say this, but user Jaque Hammer, who started the whole debate, says about himself that he cannot publish his name because he has to be politically correct on his job. By implying ((political correctness]] to forbid, as most people in Europe understand it, Islamophobia, Xenophobia and Antisemitism, does this mean then that 'political incorrectness' is allowed on the pages of Wikipedia? One has to know that Tausch is one of the few advocates of Turkish accession to the European Union within the framework of the Copenhaguen criteria and a secular and democratic Turkish Republic, so I have my gravest political doubts about this Jaque Hammer proposal User Hichem Khaldoun — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hichem Khaldoun User signature: Hichem Khaldoun(talk • contribs) 13:53, 22 January 2011 (UTC) — Hichem Khaldoun (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  • KEEP: The Attack Against Tausch is Obviously Political This is quite a ridiculous discussion triggered by the jealousy and the intellectual blindness. We shouldn't even discuss the matter. Tausch is a renowned social scientist who worked with people worldly known to be leading scientists for the quantitative approach in World Systems Theory. Jaque Hammer pretends not to see any reference to his name in this connection? Bogus! The references to Arno Tausch are quite visible on the Wikipedia itself: See: Further Reading. Here is the link to the World Systems Theory Website of the Institute for Research on World-Systems (IROWS) at the University of California, Riverside : The World-Systems Archive And here is the reference to Arno Tausch: Working Papers in the World-Systems Archive. More Here: Papers of Arno Tausch So, Jacque? Didn't you see it?

We are aware however that as Tausch is a leading European scientist who dedicated much of his time and work to defend a multicultural approach to Islam and Muslims in Europe, he has become a target for right-wing extremists. While attacking his page on Wikipedia they actually show they are not so much different from radical Islamists as to the terrorist means used against the intellectuals who oppose them. Ibn Khaldun --Ibn Khaldun78 (talk) 15:31, 22 January 2011 (UTC)— Ibn Khaldun78 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Why, then, is impact on GS so low? Xxanthippe (talk) 04:36, 23 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
  • Comment An answer from User Hichem Khaldoun: as any library science 100 course will teach you, dear user Xxanthippe, an impact analysis has to be done very carefully. Google scholar is a good instrument, just as Google book search; as with any impact analysis you have to consider that in articles and books, people use different quotation styles. So some people will refer to an 'Arno Tausch' and his works by quoting in the literature, say 'Tausch A. (1993), 'Towards a socio-liberal' etc.'; some will refer to the Commonwealth edition published by Macmillan (today Palgrave), others will refer to the edition Saint Martin's Press New York (written St' by some, Saint by others...). And this is just one work; to do justice to any scholar, you have to take the last name of an author like 'Tausch' plus key terms from his main work titles to arrive at a really adequate picture. Rest assured that entering the last name 'Tausch' plus work titles yields long lists at Google scholar, Google book search, or for that matter, any other major bibliographical service, available at major research libraries around the globe. Tausch compiled by the way a large number of scientometric evidence of this kind at his website at http://www.getcited.org/pub/103420157, well supporting his claim that publications, which he authored or co-authored, or to which he contributed, featured or feauture as recommended materials at some 30 major Universities and centers of higher learning around the world, including Harvard University, and are on the reading lists of major international organizations, such as the European Commission, the ILO, the OECD, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, the Swiss Department of Defense, the World Bank, and the United Nations, and were referred to in over 130 international journals/yearbooks, and over 90 major international textbooks of social sciences. The Harvard course was the class offered by Professor Jocelyne Cesari on Euro-Islam.User:Hichem Khladoun
Which category of "academic" (WP:Prof) are you referring to? Xxanthippe (talk) 11:24, 23 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]


Comment Dr. Tausch always makes it clear to the students in his classrooms that he has given up being a pure scientist long ago, and that, although he speaks in the classroom and in his publications as an academic, he is and remains a member of the higher echelons of the Austrian bureaucracy (true enough, his superiors want a clear distinction between these activities and his role as a writer and teacher). For that reason, publications and speaking engagements with important think tanks, as the IMEMO Institute in Moscow, are far more important to him than mere quotation figures. Perhaps it would be better to move a short and re-written article on him into the ‘public figures’ category, away from what he in his Vienna classrooms anyway calls the ‘boring Ivory Tower’. Highlights of such activities were his participation and publishing for the Luxembourg Ministry of the Economy and Foreign Trade conference on the "The Political Economy of the Lisbon Agenda" on Tuesday, 12 April 2005 in Luxembourg-Kirchberg (his paper was published as (2007), ‘The City on a Hill? The Latin Americanization of Europe and the Lost Competition with the U.S.A.’ Amsterdam: Rozenberg (for info: http://www.rozenbergps.com/). In this context, one could also mention his paper for the Luxembourg Institute for International and European Studies Conference ‘Reforming European Pension Systems’, 24 and 25 September 2004, Castle of Schengen, Luxembourg, in memory of Nobel laureate Franco Modigliani. The book in memory of Franco Modiglani was published as Arun Muralidhar & Serge Allegrezza (eds.) Reforming European Pension Systems, Luxembourg Institute for European and International Studies, with the contributions of seemingly utterly irrelevant people in it, like Robert Solow and Paul Samuelson. Without irony: Wikipedia strategists should begin to think about designing criteria, which do justice to the notability of such events, and not only to the n-th quotation of articles like the 2002 piece by Dr. Wim E. Crusio on ‘’’’Knockout mice’’’: simple solutions to the problems of genetic background and flanking genes’ Trends in Neuroscience 25: 7. 336-340 July. Wikipedia rightfully devotes a page to this Dutch scholar, user Crusio, while someone, who recently created a real furore in the German quality press by his study (with colleagues) on the efficiency and effectiveness of social spending, should not have an entry? Google News and Google News Archive should be additional categories in judging on the merits of an entry Signed User Franz weber — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franz weber (talk • contribs) 12:27, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • But news etc are sufficient to establish notability, just check WP:GNG. The problem is that all we hear here is that "there are lots of sources", but we don't get a single link to an independent third party source that is not a trivial or in-passing mention. Produce those sources and nobody will argue against notability any more. As far as citations to other scholars' publications or other people's WP bios go, please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS (or, less reverently:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS): that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. --Crusio (talk) 15:09, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And which significant sources? --Crusio (talk) 16:16, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from user Hichem Khaldoun: well what about these recent statement about one of most recent books, then?

“This volume provides a formidable account of Muslim volumes with regard to key questions of tradition and modernization, offering important new perspectives on the relationship of culture and values to social change. The data support arguments regarding the integration of Muslim majorities into modern society, while also identifying the the pockets of anti-modern extremism. The account is indispensable for a full understanding of religious and cultural conflict today.”

Russell Berman, Walter A. Haas Professor in the Humanities, Stanford University

“Professor Tausch’s astute analysis of Muslim values is the foundation to a policy response of a global issue. A study that has arrived at the appropriate time”

Yitzhak Berman, Sociologist, Bet El, Israel; former Director of the Department of Planning and Social Analysis at the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs in Jerusalem, Israel, and School of Social Work of Bar Ilan University

“I am most grateful for your excellent survey of Muslim values. I learned much from it, and I plan to share it with my colleagues and students”.

Amitai Etzioni, University Professor, The George Washington University, Washington, DC

Arno Tausch presents a powerful and controversial interpretation of the growth of contemporary religion as a protest against capitalist forms of globalization with its attendant destruction of families, communities, and restraints on sexual licentiousness. An important contribution to understanding the global struggles we face today.

Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun Magazine and author of The Left Hand of God: Taking Back our Country from the Religious Right — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hichem Khaldoun (talk • contribs) 16:54, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Interesting. I have two further comments: 1/ Do you have any references for this that we could include in the article? 2/ Concerning Etzioni's remark, that sounds like something that he would have said to Tausch personally. Can you tell us how you know about this? --Crusio (talk) 17:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's the blurb on the backcover of the 1.3 billion Muslim book, and it's mentioned on several webpages, and it's even mentioned on the official homepage of the Muslim brotherhood in the World, otherwise not directly my preferred source of information (http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=21090&ref=search.php) The blurbs for several of his others books are interesting to read as well.

(User Hichem Khaldoun)

Comment (from user Hichem Khaldoun) User Crusio, known to be a well-known scientist himself, perhaps should consider that the following reviewed and quality controlled bibliographies in the field of social sciences and international relations frequently refer to Tausch works. And you know what, by the way? I went to the Wikipedia page about the respected neurologist Dr. Wim Crusio (this said without any irony at all), and began to count the monthly access statistics for the entries in English, French and Dutch language, as an indicator of the global notability of this scholar. Gratulations (without any irony). In English they are in the region of a monthly 300-500 or so; and in the other languages at around 50 or so. And you know what, then? The Tausch figures are almost identical to the Crusio in English, and in the same region, sometimes perhaps higher, for the entries in Spanish, German and French, and in the same region for the Tausch entries in Russian, Polish, Portuguese, Arabic and Persian (Farsi). Why then all this talk about the Tausch article? Turning to the field of social sciences, especially the entries in the IREON bibliography are relevant in this context, because Tausch deals with European Union issues, and the IREON system is run by the think tank of the Federal Chancellery in Germany, the Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiftung_Wissenschaft_und_Politik; see the German Wikipedia entry):

1. Academic Onefile 2. ADB - the Article DataBase powered by Vubis 3. AMS Forschungsnetzwerk, Austria 4. Bibliographie européenne des travaux sur l'ex-URSS et l'Europe de l'Est, European Bibliography of Slavic and East European Studies (EBSEES), Europaeische Bibliographie zur Osteuropaforschung (Berlin) 5. Bibliography of Asian Studies 6. Bielefeld Search Engine BASE 7. Blackwell Synergy/John Wiley Journals 8. C.E.E.O.L. Central and Eastern Europe online 9. Cambridge Scientific Abstracts 10. CIBERA Biblioteca Virtual Latinoamericana - Comprehensive bibliography of Latin America 11. Cross Asia (Berlin) 12. Deutsche Gesellschaft fuer Auswaertige Politik 13. EBSCO 14. ECONIS 15. EINIRAS - European Information Network on International Relations and Area Studies 16. Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Federal Republic of Germany, Infoconnex Science 17. GBI Content - Genios 18. Google book search 19. Google scholar 20. IBLK Metacatalogue ‘International Relations’ (Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, Berlin) 21. IBLK The Karlsruhe bibliography on international relations 22. IBZ K.G. Sauer online 23. Index Islamicus 24. Inwent [formerly IZEP – ‘Literaturdatenbank LITDOK’] 25. IREON-Portal 26. ISI Web of Knowledge® 27. JSTOR 28. LABORDOC ILO 29. Lalisio literature search - Q Sensei 30. MENALIB – Middle East Virtual Library University of Halle an der Saale, FRG 31. MERLN Military Educational Reseéarch Library Network 32. Periodicals Index Online 33. POLDOK journal literature 34. Proquest Abiinform 35. Questia 36. Sage Journals online 37. Scopus 38. SOWIDOK 39. UNBIS Net United Nations Bibliographical Resource from the UN's Dag Hammarskjoeld Library 40. Vascoda 41. VIFAPOL - SSG Politikwissenschaft und Friedensforschung 42. Virtual Library Eastern Europe 43. Worldcat 44. Worldwidescience.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hichem Khaldoun (talk • contribs) 09:09, 24 January 2011 (UTC) — Hichem Khaldoun (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  • Comment I'm sorry, but that long list of indexes (even IREON) doesn't really mean much. What they establish is that these publications exist, which is not in doubt anyway. They do not establish, however, that these publications have been noticed, which is what would establish notability. Please see WP:PROF to get an idea of what is needed here (that guideline not only gives criteria, but also hints on where to find sources). As for access statistics on WP, these have no bearing whatsoever on establishing notability. Please read the guidelines! --Crusio (talk) 09:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (from User Franz weber) I would not like to vote in this debate here, but let me come up with a practical suggestion: I think that user Msrasnw would be Wikipedia experienced enough to come up with an article really conforming in style to Wiki standards and in the sense of the suggestions he has made here on these pages [User Franz weber]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franz weber (talk • contribs) 15:14, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reply: Dear Franz Weber, thank you for your assumption I am experienced enough to be able to help the article conform to the standards required. I will try do that when this Afd debate is over if the article is kept. (Perhaps I should try now - but I don't know that it would help and would perhaps annoy everyone). Looking at the debate it would seem to me no-consensus has been reached. I think the subsequent article I might produce would be massively reduced in size (it would be stubbish) and although I can imagine some would be resistant to losing lots of the current content I try and see what I can do. (PS: I am in no way connected with Dr Tausch (or Nova Publishers) but was taught, very briefly, by Andre Gunder Frank so I know a little bit about this World Systems stuff.) (Msrasnw (talk) 12:09, 26 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]
  • I think you are assuming too much here. AfD is not a !vote and the closing admin will decide based on the arguments presented. As far as I can see, the "delete" !votes all give solid arguments, whereas the "keep" votes basically only say "is notable, keep". Barring reliable sources confirming notability, I cannot see how the decision could be anything other than "delete". --Crusio (talk) 12:38, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
* Reply to Crusio, I think you are a little presumptious in claiming that my reply is "assuming to much". I don't know that you could fairly say I was assuming this will be kept - all I said was that it seems to me no-consensus has been reached. I think both or either wp:prof #1 via looking at how widely the person's books are held in various academic libraries (this information is available in Worldcat) and/or wp:author #3 via the person has created a significant or well-known work collective body of work, that has been the subject of multiple reviews are plausible grounds for keeping. And that the article has this information in it albeit hidden by lots of stuff. (And those pushing for deletion should be aware of asymmetries in these debates and their results and the importance of civility) PS: Also I think it is perhaps not a good idea to be criticising peoples CVs here. We all have our faults. Anyway best wishes :) (Msrasnw (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]
  • Delete This vote will probably earn me another angry email from Dr. Tausch, with copies to what he seems to perceive as my hierarchical superiors. However, despite a large volume of publications, these seem to go largely unnoticed as shown above by Xxanthippe and Hrafn (Web of Science gives similar citation rates as what they report). Despite the activity of two highly-motivated SPAs here, no reliable, independent sources showing notability have been forthcoming. I have waded through parts of his extensive CV (4.24 Mb) posted here, which seems to contain virtually every single instance his work has been mentioned anywhere and have not found anything that would meet the requirements of WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR. --Crusio (talk) 05:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (from User Hichem Khaldoun) Dr. Wim Crusio is a scientist with high a reputation in the field of neurology, and this comment should help him in his 'wading' (isn't that expression slanderous, in a way?) through literature and references to find out Tausch's impact on the course of the political science debate on dependency, development, global and also Austrian poverty, globalization etc. This impact can be followed from the substantial reception, his works received in international standard sources with a very high 'impact factor' on the 'Google scholar' system, the ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and also the journals covered in other indices, which are more geographically balanced and take into account the literature from Eastern Europe, Latin America, the Muslim world etc.etc., all mentioned in his CV. Beginning with his doctoral dissertation in 1976, which has been referred to, pages after pages, as one of the most important substantial evidences in THE classic of dependency theory in Germany, 'Weltwirtschaftsordnung and Entwicklungspolitik' (actually with a Google scholar quotation factor of over 400) written by Dieter Senghaas to todays quotations from his works, to be found in the books written by people like Patrick Bond (his highest quotation factor, achieved in Google Scholar is over 500), any well-informed social scientist in the field of international development will tell you that the name 'Arno Tausch' is to be well encountered in the literature. Since entering public administration by having become a diplomat at the Austrian Embassy in Warsaw in 1992, science seems not to be an end in itself to this author, but any objective evaluation will look at the reviews of his works in such journals as 'Choice. Current Reviews for Academic Libraries', 'Das Argument', 'Journal of Australian Political Economy', 'Journal of Common Market Studies', 'Political Studies', 'Theologie im Kontext', Vierteljahresberichte. Probleme der Internationalen Zusammenarbeit Friedrich Ebert Foundation, etc. As Andre Gunder Frank, with whom he closely worked since 1972 (actually Herrmann/Tausch published the last-ever article written by this truly global scholar), Dr. Tausch is well aware about the parochiality of what is bombastically called 'global science', reflected in such Indices as the ISI Web of Science or Scopus, limited practically to the countries of the centre, and disregarding wide areas of our globe, such as Latin America, Africa, wide parts of Asia, Eastern Europe. I say: triumph in triumph, relegate the Tausch entry from Wikipedia, enjoy the notability of your own research, while you evict a source of information perhaps useful to users of the internet in countries such as India or Tanzania and celebrate your victory (User Hichem Khaldoun). PS: of particular importance for the debate in the Netherlands:

Muslim Calvinism - Internal Security and The Lisbon Process In Europe The European Social Survey Data, and Internal Security in Europe Arno Tausch, Christian Bischof & Karl Mueller

The book "Muslim Calvinism: Internal Security and the Lisbon Process in Europe" provides a new and challenging scientific analysis about Muslims and non-Muslims in Europe and their trust in policy, democracy and personal happiness; a challenging book for all interested readers, especially with the focus of the Muslim and non-Muslim policy in Europe.

Prof. Dr. Dr.h.c.mult. Friedrich Schneider Johannes Kepler, University of Linz Department of Economics — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hichem Khaldoun (talk • contribs) 10:02, 26 January 2011 (UTC) — Hichem Khaldoun (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  • Comment: I have started with some minor attempts to improve the article - trivially with a smaller size of the picture - but more substantially looking for reviews of Tausch's work. Just picking the first book this has been reviewed in Choice's outstanding academic books, 1992-1997 and in Political Studies and it has according to WorldCat 252 US libraries holding it. These would seem to me reliable sources for helping meet our requirements. Should I carry on adding such things or wait for the result of the debate? (Msrasnw (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]
  • Delete: using the conventional metrics commonly applied to AfDs here, I see no basis for an article on this person. He is obviously prolific, but that only makes it all the more clear that the attention his work has received is not extensive. A number of the keep votes above are clearly not familiar with the relevant notability standards and how they are applied (I do not of course include DGG in that comment). Nomoskedasticity (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2011 (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.
  1. ^ WorldCat identities page
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Arno_Tausch_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1089102499"