Jump to content

Talk:James Honeycutt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

An encyclopedia article is not a CV. CVs contain everything possible. encyclopedia article s contain the material that contributes to notability and that would be of itnetest to the general public who has heard of the person. Make sure the article contains, first, the basic biographical information such as birthyear and birthdplace, then the full sequence of degrees and professional positions in chronological order, with dates. Next, a complete list of books published, with year, date, publisher, ISBN (referenced to WorldCat), and links to published reviews of the books; and (in the sciences) the 5 or so most cited peer-reviewed articles, given in full with coauthors, full name of journals, and links, with the number of citations to each of them from Google Scholar of Scopus or ISI (book chapters and conferences proceedings don't count, and should not even be included) ; any national level awards--(not junior awards or awards from their own university) Add major national-level outside positions, such as president of the major national organizations, and any positions of editor-in-chief ; Membership or minor offices in most societies, and service on editorial boards, do not count for much & are better omitted. Very sparse articles attract skepticism. as do those using vague claims and superlatives, or those that list all possible internal and external committes.

I cannot tell from the way this is written whether of not the individual will meet the requirements for WP:PROF. Try rewriting it, and notify me. DGG ( talk ) 05:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC).[reply]

A Notability Assessment: Results Below.

[edit]

In accordance with WP:AFC, which indicates step one is to "make sure that the topic is notable enough for an article.", my first task in creating this page was to determine notabiity. I've tried to document my assessment below to explain the rationale to other editors. Deleteopedia (talk) 23:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notability Assessment under WP:NPROF(1): "Significant Impact"

Guidelines:

[edit]
WP:NPROF(1) is met when: The professor's " research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline... as demonstrated by independent reliable sources".
Expand the Box Below for Specific Criterion for Meeting NPROF(1): "Significant Impact".
  • HIGH CITATION RATE:
  • NPROF(1) is satisfied by "... an author of highly cited academic work".
  • " Differences in typical citation and publication rates...should be taken into account... rates in humanities are generally lower".
  • -> The table below addresses this with a discipline specific comparison between Honeycutt top scholars in communication.
  • IF PASSED: ONLY need to pass this guideline:
  • Supersedes WP:GNG: NPROF "is explicitly listed as an alternative to the general notability guideline."
  • Supersedes other WP:NPROF and all WP:SNG: "Academics meeting any one of the following conditions... are notable."
  • NPROF Standard Designed for Inclusion" This guideline sets the bar fairly low, which is natural"
  • ... or...
  • SIGNIFICANT NEW CONCEPT:
  • NPROF(1) is " satisfied if the person has pioneered or developed a significant new concept", independent of citation rate above.

Evidence:

[edit]
Expand Below: Metrics From Google Scholar (GS) and Web of Science (WoS) Comparing Honeycutt to Top 1% of Scholars.
The Most Central (top 1 %) Authors from 24 Communication Journals, 2007–2011, Consist of 35 Scholars[1], a Sampling is Below.
Sorting the table by metric demonstrates Honeycutt's metrics are similar to the bottom of the top 1%, placing him above 99% of scholars in the discipline.
Rank[1] Author's Full Name[1] H-index (GS) H-index (WoS) Citations (GS) Citations (WoS) Pubs (GS) Pubs (WoS) i10-index (GS) University Affiliation
1 Thomas H Feeley 41 25 5591 1987 158 78 79 U of Buffalo
2 Timothy R Levine 53 31 10077 3126 173 80 132 U of Alabama-Birmingham
3 R Lance Holbert 40 29 7860 2887 102 57 60 Temple
4 Franklin J Boster[2]   21   1214   57   Michigan State
5 Michael Pfau[2]   28   1664   45   U of Oklahoma
10 Michael E Roloff[2]   19   1126   48   Northwestern
14 Graham D Bodie 34 12 3473 385 118 29 65 LSU
20 Ron Tamborini 44 25 6755 1993 44 61 81 Michigan State
25 Catherine Y K Westerman 12 7 620 201 36 19 14 North Dakota State
35end Amber M Reinhart 13 9 1174 561 20 19 13 U of Missouri-St. Louis
? James M Honeycutt 34 10 3398 415 143 31 70 LSU
  1. ^ a b c |Griffin, D.J., Bolkan, S., Holmgren, J.L. et al.(2016). Central journals and authors in communication using a publication network. Scientometrics 106, 91–104, Table 2.
  2. ^ a b c No Google Scholar Profile.

Analysis:

[edit]
Honeycutt's Metrics clearly meet WP:NPROF(1) under the standard for comparison set forth in General Guideline 3 & Specific Criterion 1.3
(Expand Below for Specific Analysis).
  • NPROF Standard for Comparison - The Average Professor: "The criteria above are sometimes summed up as an "Average Professor Test": When judged against the average impact of a researcher in a given field, does this researcher stand out as clearly more notable or more accomplished?" from WP:NPROF[General Guideline 3].
  • By definition, the "Average Professor" is in the 50th percentile, while Honeycutt's metrics above put him nearer to the 99th, far above the "Average Professor".

  • ... also...
  • The Inclusion of Honeycutt's I Theory in ALL the major International and National Disciplinary Encyclopedias published by the discipline's professional organizations, as well as the invitation for him to author these entries, shows both widespread adoption of the theory, as well as attribution to him. This independently meets WP:NPROF(1) under specific criterion 1.3, " developed a significant new concept".

Notability Assessment under WP:NPROF(5): "Distinguished Professor"

Guidelines:

[edit]
WP:NPROF(5) is met when: The professor "has held a... distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research.
Expand the Box Below for Specific Criterion for Meeting NPROF(5): "Distinguished Professor".
  • "For documenting that a person has held such an appointment publications of the appointing institution are considered a reliable source".
  • ---> Evidence from LSU that he is referred to by the honorific and that he was awarded the award conferring it seems to be all that is required.

Evidence:

[edit]
LSU.EDU states specifically: 1) he is referred to by the honorific "Distinguished Professor" and 2) that he was awarded the distinguished faculty award in 2012.
Expand the Box Below for Links:

Analysis:

[edit]

Evidence above clearly demonstrates that 1) he "held a distinguished professor appointment" and 2) is "considered a reliable source" as per WP:NPROF(1)

Notability Assessment under WP:GNG: General Notability Guidelines

Source Assessment Table: WORK IN PROGRESS

[edit]
[edit]

After looking at all the options and relevant Wikipedia Policies, I decided to ask the subject to donate the copyright under WP:CONSENT at his email of record on his lsu.edu faculty bio. the resulting exchange is below. Deleteopedia (talk) 18:35, 17 February 2021 (UTC) :-------------------------------->[reply]
OTRS permission has been approved and can be found either at Wikimedia Commons, or below. Deleteopedia (talk) 06:55, 18 June 2021 (UTC) [reply]

OTRS Request & Donation of Copyright


File:HoneycuttDonationofCopyright.jpg
OTRS Permission Approved: See Ticket #2021021910007914.
OTRS approval for photo of Distinguished Professor Emeritus James Honeycutt.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:James_Honeycutt&oldid=1202784765"