- 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. On balance it appears she does not have a significant enough body of work to meet WP:PROF. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:06, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Sudha Shenoy
- Sudha Shenoy ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not a notable economist. No claim made for notability. Clearly fails WP:PROF. LK ( talk) 02:32, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Keep One of the topmost figures in contemporary Austrian libertarian economics, [1] she is acknowledged formally as the one who introduced the Tiger by the Tail theory of Nobel Laureate Friedrich Hayek. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Here's an obit of Shenoy by John Blundell (economist). One more by Steven Horwitz. Another by Robert Higgs. [6] Another obit by Chris Matthew Sciabarra. And one more by Karen en De Coster. Quoted and praised by many researchers and economists alike, [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] she was an editorial board member of The Review of Austrian Economics. [19] Based on all this, I would say the impact she has left on the Austrian school of economics is quite enduring and significant, which makes the subject qualify on WP:PROF. Lourdes 15:32, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark ( talk) 23:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark ( talk) 23:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark ( talk) 23:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. Academics are judged by by the impact their work has had on others. Although she has worked with a very influential economist, her citations on GS (Sudha R Shenoy) are too small to pass WP:Prof#C1. I am open to change my vote on production of better evidence. Xxanthippe ( talk) 23:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC).
- Hello Xxanthippe, I was actually looking at the impact she has had (broadly construed, as suggested by WP:PROF#1), documented by reliable sources. For example, Lawrence H. White writes that she "was one of the first to promote liberalization of Indian economic policy during the 1970s." [20] He also writes in another co-authored report, "Nevertheless, in India in the 1940s and 1950s, no one in academic circles other than Shenoy fought against statism and central planning." [21] The European Center of Austrian Economics Foundation considers her amongst the 6th generation of eminent Austrian economists, alongside Nobel laureates like Vernon Smith. [22] Robert Leeson writes in his book that when Sudha Shenoy along with Richard Ebeling, Gary North, Murray Rothbard et al "initiated an Austrian revivalist conference in 1974, one of the highlights was the baiting of Friedman [...] Subsequently, US Presidents and Presidential hopefuls embraced the Austrian School of Economics." [23] These works and many such other references point out to the impact her work has had globally. I would look forward to whether you may consider this perspective of WP:PROF#1, which says "The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed,... the absence of references in Google Scholar should not be used as proof of non-notability." Lourdes 00:29, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comment. This is an unusual case. Although she appears to have been a committed disciple of the great
Friedrich Hayek (a GS
h-index of 107 no less!) she seems to have done little on her own and has not held a substantial academic position. Maybe
WP:GNG would help?
Xxanthippe (
talk)
00:54, 20 May 2017 (UTC).
- Thanks. With
Steven Horwitz addressing her as "truly one of the founders of the Austrian revival"
[24] and
John Blundell describing her as "the original pin-up model of the Austrian school of thought in economics,"
[25] I would prefer
WP:PROF as that explicitly considers the impact rather than the number of her works ("Having published does not, in itself, make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are. Notability depends on the impact the work has had on the field of study."). Thanks.
Lourdes
01:08, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- The difficulty is the lack of citations to independent work. Her highest cited publication A Tiger by the Tail gets only 79 citations on GS and anyway was written by
Hayek; she only compiled it. She evidently was a person much regarded in the circle of libertarian economists ("pin-up girl", a sexist remark if ever I heard one), as the several obituaries that you quote show, but Wikipedia is not a repository for obituaries
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. I can't see a pass of
WP:Prof here, but, as I suggested before, can a case be made for
WP:GNG? (late sign)
Xxanthippe (
talk)
06:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC).
- Hello again. I'm sorry but I think you misunderstand
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The guideline refers to not using Wikipedia as a memorial service for non-notable individuals like one's friends, relatives.... It does not prohibit the usage of obituaries written by reliable sources to prove notability of subjects. In fact, reliably sourced obits are one of the best sources on Wikipedia to understand and confirm enduring notability (e.g. in my references above Chris Matthew Sciabarra too calls her "one of the great, and gentle, voices of the Austrian economics revival." This points to the impact she has had). Notwithstanding that, I would mention that the sources I quoted of
White, Austrian Economics Foundation, Robert Leeson are not obits. In my opinion, these sources – combined with obits given by
Blundell,
Horwitz,
Sciabarra, et al (all of whom mention that she is one of the founders of Austrian school revival or that she is amongst the great Austrian economists), satisfies
WP:PROF, a guideline which attempts to assess the impact of the individual on their respective field etc.
WP:PROF also considers editorial board membership in respectable publications (to which part, I have provided a source above confirming that the subject was an editorial board member of
The Review of Austrian Economics). I realize that you may not agree with my view, but I have to thank you for the time you've taken to assess the subject. I look forward to interact with you again across Wikipedia. Cheers.
Lourdes
01:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- All of the obits listed above appear to be personal blogs, and hence not reliable. Were there any obituaries published in newspapers, journals, or other reliable sources. (Not counting paid death notices in newspapers; I mean only the newspaper obituaries that the newspaper editors publish themselves.) —
David Eppstein (
talk)
04:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- Hello David, no. I haven't been able to find any newspaper/journal obits. Lourdes 08:10, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- All of the obits listed above appear to be personal blogs, and hence not reliable. Were there any obituaries published in newspapers, journals, or other reliable sources. (Not counting paid death notices in newspapers; I mean only the newspaper obituaries that the newspaper editors publish themselves.) —
David Eppstein (
talk)
04:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- Hello again. I'm sorry but I think you misunderstand
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The guideline refers to not using Wikipedia as a memorial service for non-notable individuals like one's friends, relatives.... It does not prohibit the usage of obituaries written by reliable sources to prove notability of subjects. In fact, reliably sourced obits are one of the best sources on Wikipedia to understand and confirm enduring notability (e.g. in my references above Chris Matthew Sciabarra too calls her "one of the great, and gentle, voices of the Austrian economics revival." This points to the impact she has had). Notwithstanding that, I would mention that the sources I quoted of
White, Austrian Economics Foundation, Robert Leeson are not obits. In my opinion, these sources – combined with obits given by
Blundell,
Horwitz,
Sciabarra, et al (all of whom mention that she is one of the founders of Austrian school revival or that she is amongst the great Austrian economists), satisfies
WP:PROF, a guideline which attempts to assess the impact of the individual on their respective field etc.
WP:PROF also considers editorial board membership in respectable publications (to which part, I have provided a source above confirming that the subject was an editorial board member of
The Review of Austrian Economics). I realize that you may not agree with my view, but I have to thank you for the time you've taken to assess the subject. I look forward to interact with you again across Wikipedia. Cheers.
Lourdes
01:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- The difficulty is the lack of citations to independent work. Her highest cited publication A Tiger by the Tail gets only 79 citations on GS and anyway was written by
Hayek; she only compiled it. She evidently was a person much regarded in the circle of libertarian economists ("pin-up girl", a sexist remark if ever I heard one), as the several obituaries that you quote show, but Wikipedia is not a repository for obituaries
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. I can't see a pass of
WP:Prof here, but, as I suggested before, can a case be made for
WP:GNG? (late sign)
Xxanthippe (
talk)
06:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC).
- Thanks. With
Steven Horwitz addressing her as "truly one of the founders of the Austrian revival"
[24] and
John Blundell describing her as "the original pin-up model of the Austrian school of thought in economics,"
[25] I would prefer
WP:PROF as that explicitly considers the impact rather than the number of her works ("Having published does not, in itself, make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are. Notability depends on the impact the work has had on the field of study."). Thanks.
Lourdes
01:08, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comment. This is an unusual case. Although she appears to have been a committed disciple of the great
Friedrich Hayek (a GS
h-index of 107 no less!) she seems to have done little on her own and has not held a substantial academic position. Maybe
WP:GNG would help?
Xxanthippe (
talk)
00:54, 20 May 2017 (UTC).
References
- ^ Hayek, F. A., & Shenoy, S. R. (1972). A tiger by the tail: a 40-years' running commentary on Keynesianism by Hayek (Vol. 4). Transatlantic Arts.
- Delete. As discussed above, she does not appear to pass WP:PROF but might pass WP:GNG. However, all sources in the article and provided about her above are either unreliable blogs or (for one reference currently in the article) an interview with the subject, something that past AfDs have found not to contribute to GNG notability. So I don't see a pass at this time, but I would be willing to change my mind if better sources turn up. — David Eppstein ( talk) 04:52, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- Delete This article presents her as an academic, hence, the relevant guideline is WP:PROF , which is generally more lenient than WP:GNG. She clearly fails to pass any of the criteria at WP:PROF. In her field of Economics (broadly construed, as suggested by WP:PROF#1), or more narrowly Development economics, the impact she has had is negligible to non-existent. Austrian school economics is a methodology, and should not a considered her field of study. LK ( talk) 02:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. On balance it appears she does not have a significant enough body of work to meet WP:PROF. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:06, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Sudha Shenoy
- Sudha Shenoy ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not a notable economist. No claim made for notability. Clearly fails WP:PROF. LK ( talk) 02:32, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Keep One of the topmost figures in contemporary Austrian libertarian economics, [1] she is acknowledged formally as the one who introduced the Tiger by the Tail theory of Nobel Laureate Friedrich Hayek. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Here's an obit of Shenoy by John Blundell (economist). One more by Steven Horwitz. Another by Robert Higgs. [6] Another obit by Chris Matthew Sciabarra. And one more by Karen en De Coster. Quoted and praised by many researchers and economists alike, [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] she was an editorial board member of The Review of Austrian Economics. [19] Based on all this, I would say the impact she has left on the Austrian school of economics is quite enduring and significant, which makes the subject qualify on WP:PROF. Lourdes 15:32, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark ( talk) 23:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark ( talk) 23:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark ( talk) 23:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. Academics are judged by by the impact their work has had on others. Although she has worked with a very influential economist, her citations on GS (Sudha R Shenoy) are too small to pass WP:Prof#C1. I am open to change my vote on production of better evidence. Xxanthippe ( talk) 23:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC).
- Hello Xxanthippe, I was actually looking at the impact she has had (broadly construed, as suggested by WP:PROF#1), documented by reliable sources. For example, Lawrence H. White writes that she "was one of the first to promote liberalization of Indian economic policy during the 1970s." [20] He also writes in another co-authored report, "Nevertheless, in India in the 1940s and 1950s, no one in academic circles other than Shenoy fought against statism and central planning." [21] The European Center of Austrian Economics Foundation considers her amongst the 6th generation of eminent Austrian economists, alongside Nobel laureates like Vernon Smith. [22] Robert Leeson writes in his book that when Sudha Shenoy along with Richard Ebeling, Gary North, Murray Rothbard et al "initiated an Austrian revivalist conference in 1974, one of the highlights was the baiting of Friedman [...] Subsequently, US Presidents and Presidential hopefuls embraced the Austrian School of Economics." [23] These works and many such other references point out to the impact her work has had globally. I would look forward to whether you may consider this perspective of WP:PROF#1, which says "The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed,... the absence of references in Google Scholar should not be used as proof of non-notability." Lourdes 00:29, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comment. This is an unusual case. Although she appears to have been a committed disciple of the great
Friedrich Hayek (a GS
h-index of 107 no less!) she seems to have done little on her own and has not held a substantial academic position. Maybe
WP:GNG would help?
Xxanthippe (
talk)
00:54, 20 May 2017 (UTC).
- Thanks. With
Steven Horwitz addressing her as "truly one of the founders of the Austrian revival"
[24] and
John Blundell describing her as "the original pin-up model of the Austrian school of thought in economics,"
[25] I would prefer
WP:PROF as that explicitly considers the impact rather than the number of her works ("Having published does not, in itself, make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are. Notability depends on the impact the work has had on the field of study."). Thanks.
Lourdes
01:08, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- The difficulty is the lack of citations to independent work. Her highest cited publication A Tiger by the Tail gets only 79 citations on GS and anyway was written by
Hayek; she only compiled it. She evidently was a person much regarded in the circle of libertarian economists ("pin-up girl", a sexist remark if ever I heard one), as the several obituaries that you quote show, but Wikipedia is not a repository for obituaries
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. I can't see a pass of
WP:Prof here, but, as I suggested before, can a case be made for
WP:GNG? (late sign)
Xxanthippe (
talk)
06:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC).
- Hello again. I'm sorry but I think you misunderstand
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The guideline refers to not using Wikipedia as a memorial service for non-notable individuals like one's friends, relatives.... It does not prohibit the usage of obituaries written by reliable sources to prove notability of subjects. In fact, reliably sourced obits are one of the best sources on Wikipedia to understand and confirm enduring notability (e.g. in my references above Chris Matthew Sciabarra too calls her "one of the great, and gentle, voices of the Austrian economics revival." This points to the impact she has had). Notwithstanding that, I would mention that the sources I quoted of
White, Austrian Economics Foundation, Robert Leeson are not obits. In my opinion, these sources – combined with obits given by
Blundell,
Horwitz,
Sciabarra, et al (all of whom mention that she is one of the founders of Austrian school revival or that she is amongst the great Austrian economists), satisfies
WP:PROF, a guideline which attempts to assess the impact of the individual on their respective field etc.
WP:PROF also considers editorial board membership in respectable publications (to which part, I have provided a source above confirming that the subject was an editorial board member of
The Review of Austrian Economics). I realize that you may not agree with my view, but I have to thank you for the time you've taken to assess the subject. I look forward to interact with you again across Wikipedia. Cheers.
Lourdes
01:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- All of the obits listed above appear to be personal blogs, and hence not reliable. Were there any obituaries published in newspapers, journals, or other reliable sources. (Not counting paid death notices in newspapers; I mean only the newspaper obituaries that the newspaper editors publish themselves.) —
David Eppstein (
talk)
04:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- Hello David, no. I haven't been able to find any newspaper/journal obits. Lourdes 08:10, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- All of the obits listed above appear to be personal blogs, and hence not reliable. Were there any obituaries published in newspapers, journals, or other reliable sources. (Not counting paid death notices in newspapers; I mean only the newspaper obituaries that the newspaper editors publish themselves.) —
David Eppstein (
talk)
04:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- Hello again. I'm sorry but I think you misunderstand
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The guideline refers to not using Wikipedia as a memorial service for non-notable individuals like one's friends, relatives.... It does not prohibit the usage of obituaries written by reliable sources to prove notability of subjects. In fact, reliably sourced obits are one of the best sources on Wikipedia to understand and confirm enduring notability (e.g. in my references above Chris Matthew Sciabarra too calls her "one of the great, and gentle, voices of the Austrian economics revival." This points to the impact she has had). Notwithstanding that, I would mention that the sources I quoted of
White, Austrian Economics Foundation, Robert Leeson are not obits. In my opinion, these sources – combined with obits given by
Blundell,
Horwitz,
Sciabarra, et al (all of whom mention that she is one of the founders of Austrian school revival or that she is amongst the great Austrian economists), satisfies
WP:PROF, a guideline which attempts to assess the impact of the individual on their respective field etc.
WP:PROF also considers editorial board membership in respectable publications (to which part, I have provided a source above confirming that the subject was an editorial board member of
The Review of Austrian Economics). I realize that you may not agree with my view, but I have to thank you for the time you've taken to assess the subject. I look forward to interact with you again across Wikipedia. Cheers.
Lourdes
01:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- The difficulty is the lack of citations to independent work. Her highest cited publication A Tiger by the Tail gets only 79 citations on GS and anyway was written by
Hayek; she only compiled it. She evidently was a person much regarded in the circle of libertarian economists ("pin-up girl", a sexist remark if ever I heard one), as the several obituaries that you quote show, but Wikipedia is not a repository for obituaries
WP:NOTMEMORIAL. I can't see a pass of
WP:Prof here, but, as I suggested before, can a case be made for
WP:GNG? (late sign)
Xxanthippe (
talk)
06:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC).
- Thanks. With
Steven Horwitz addressing her as "truly one of the founders of the Austrian revival"
[24] and
John Blundell describing her as "the original pin-up model of the Austrian school of thought in economics,"
[25] I would prefer
WP:PROF as that explicitly considers the impact rather than the number of her works ("Having published does not, in itself, make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are. Notability depends on the impact the work has had on the field of study."). Thanks.
Lourdes
01:08, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comment. This is an unusual case. Although she appears to have been a committed disciple of the great
Friedrich Hayek (a GS
h-index of 107 no less!) she seems to have done little on her own and has not held a substantial academic position. Maybe
WP:GNG would help?
Xxanthippe (
talk)
00:54, 20 May 2017 (UTC).
References
- ^ Hayek, F. A., & Shenoy, S. R. (1972). A tiger by the tail: a 40-years' running commentary on Keynesianism by Hayek (Vol. 4). Transatlantic Arts.
- Delete. As discussed above, she does not appear to pass WP:PROF but might pass WP:GNG. However, all sources in the article and provided about her above are either unreliable blogs or (for one reference currently in the article) an interview with the subject, something that past AfDs have found not to contribute to GNG notability. So I don't see a pass at this time, but I would be willing to change my mind if better sources turn up. — David Eppstein ( talk) 04:52, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
- Delete This article presents her as an academic, hence, the relevant guideline is WP:PROF , which is generally more lenient than WP:GNG. She clearly fails to pass any of the criteria at WP:PROF. In her field of Economics (broadly construed, as suggested by WP:PROF#1), or more narrowly Development economics, the impact she has had is negligible to non-existent. Austrian school economics is a methodology, and should not a considered her field of study. LK ( talk) 02:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- 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.