Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniela Landert: Difference between revisions

Daniela Landert (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)

Contested draftification and PROD. Fails WP:NPROF and WP:GNG. No independent and in depth sources about the author. Tenshi! (Talk page) 11:20, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have seen multiple reliable sources from [[2]], [[3]], [[4]], [[5]] thus pas GNG and WP:NPROF 102.91.101.139 (talk) 14:16, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

None of those sources you have presented are independent or show significant coverage. Tenshi! (Talk page) 14:24, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These sources are are both independent and reliable:

– Heidelberg University website

– Journal of Historical Pragmatics

– Swiss National Science Foundation

– University of Zurich

– University of Basel

– International Society for the Linguistics of English

– Journal of Pragmatics

– Cambridge University Press Magaxian (talk) 14:02, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Okay, I’ll go through each source in the article (as of 1311910859).

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
	Daniela works for Heidelberg University.			✘ No
	Daniela works for LINGUIST List		Routine announcement of employment change	✘ No
	SNSF issue the PRIMA grants.		Information page about PRIMA grants.	✘ No
	Daniela led the project herself.		Listing page of The Pragmatics of Improvised Drama Comedy project.	✘ No
		Not sure how to determine reliability for this type of source	About her publication, not her. Notability is not inherited	✘ No
		See above	About her publication, not her. Notability is not inherited	✘ No
		See above	About her publication, not her. Notability is not inherited	✘ No
“Daniela Landert”. English Department, University of Zurich. Retrieved 15 September 2025.	I’m doubtful of why a University would have a page to an alumni in the staff section, but I can’t see any clear indication of her working there. Daniela is a docent for the University of Zurich.		Solely about where she works, what she studied, and her research.	✘ No
	Failed to access, domain not registered	Failed to access, domain not registered	Failed to access, domain not registered	? Unknown
	Daniela worked at the University of Basel		Routine announcement of employment change	✘ No
	Published by University of Heidelberg’s website where Daniela works		Invitation to the lecture.	✘ No
“Plenary speakers”. International Society for the Linguistics of English (ISLE 8). Retrieved 15 September 2025.			Listing of speakers for an event with the description of Daniela from the University of Heidelberg’s website	✘ No
	Listing of her own book she wrote	Walled	Walled	✘ No
	Listing of book that she co-wrote.	Offline source	Offline source	✘ No
	Listing of her own book she wrote	Walled	Walled	✘ No
Landert, Daniela (2021). “The spontaneous co-creation of comedy: Humour in improvised theatrical fiction”. Journal of Pragmatics. 173: 68–87. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2020.12.007.	Book that she wrote herself.	Offline source	Offline source	✘ No
		See above.	About her publication, not her. Notability is not inherited	✘ No
		See above.	About her publication, not her. Notability is not inherited	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

I’ll agree that some of the sources you list are independent and reliable, but none count towards notability. Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:18, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UZH has an ‘alumna’ on their site because she is Public Docent there after having received the habilitation there.

On a Cambridge University Press website, you don’t list your own work, the publisher does it. And backs it with its prestige. The same applies to all reputable academic publications..

Universities and public organizations do not use their online presence to promote their academics like employees of a company. Magaxian (talk) 17:10, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the source assessment accordingly to note that she was a docent. Having the Cambridge University Press website publish it doesn’t contribute to notability though. Tenshi! (Talk page) 22:24, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I’m leaning delete. She is mentioned twice in Swiss media, both times in passing, which is a little surprising for a Swiss professor, though she is still quite young. None of the sources linked here are independent, and though I haven’t quite checked all of them I’m pretty sure all those in the article aren’t either. I think this is a “too soon” situation. Toadspike [Talk] 14:47, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Please do check the references, these sources are are both independent and reliable:

  – Heidelberg University website

  – Journal of Historical Pragmatics

  – Swiss National Science Foundation

  – University of Zurich

  – University of Basel

  – International Society for the Linguistics of English

  – Journal of Pragmatics

  – Cambridge University Press

  Magaxian (talk) 15:01, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Switching to keep per reviews listed below. Toadspike [Talk] 00:21, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as passes WP:NPROF criteria #8 as editor of Journal of Historical Pragmatics. Also passes WP:NAUTHOR with multiple reviews for two books. Nnev66 (talk) 21:19, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Nnev66 Thanks for pointing out the reviews. The IP’s and Magaxian’s comments here were a red herring. For others, these [6][7][8][9][10] are decent reviews of Landert’s work. Some are fairly lengthy and mention/praise her repeatedly. I am not sure whether reviews in the journal associated with the book or published by the book’s publisher are any less independent, but there’s enough here to change my mind. @A. B.@Tenshi Hinanawi, thoughts?

  I saw the journal, too, but wasn’t sure if it qualified as major, well-established. I have now checked the Scopus listing [11], which seems decent. I’m not a great judge of journal notability, but if it is notable I suppose someone could turn Journal of Historical Pragmatics blue. Toadspike [Talk] 00:21, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I thought about if it was a major enough journal for #8 but it’s for a niche field so not surprised that IF is lower than average. It is a peer-reviewed well established journal which is why I !voted keep via NPROF. I then noticed the reviews which makes me even more comfortable with my !vote. Nnev66 (talk) 02:25, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]