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 sourcedmust 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.
This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2018. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles
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 within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
An image is requested for this article as its inclusion will substantially increase the significance of the article. Please remove the image-needed parameter once the image is added.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
A New Page Patroller reviewed the article, and made no proposed changes - but asked for more evidence of Notability. This professor is a visible, cited and active figure in literature and women's studies, so I was surprised, but anyway I have checked Scopus, and one item, at least, the major work of 2009, is logged as cited more than 20 times, so I think that substantiates the point. But I ask WP Ireland or others to double-check me, and rate the article.Twilson r (talk) 18:12, 18 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
As promised, I return to this. First I note, even more after 000s of articles reviewed across 2018 - I believe that the majority of academics listed in Wikipedia do not meet the (high) standards set in the current guideline, which in turn seem much more rigorous than the level reached by the vast majority of articles on sportspeople, for example. As I believe that Wikipedia should capture widely, I see no issue here. But in this case, I review against the guideline, specifically focusing on Criterion 1, influence / uptake / citation.
So, in terms of evidence of notability, as per the guideline the humanities tend to be under-counted and hard-to-assess using citation records such as those from Scopus (which neglect, for example, book chapters). So of this professor's dozens of peer-reviewed published works, just 6 appear in Scopus; at least 1 of those shows wide citation, 23 occurences. OK, but we need more. The guideline then suggests that this be supplemented by a check on holdings in academic libraries, which says something about academic interest, probable use of the academic's works, and influence. I will revert further on this.SeoR (talk) 11:50, 19 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
Having dug into this in the academic meta-catalog WorldCat and with some direct searches, and, also, comparing to a small sample of other academic texts, I see that some of Ingman's works have become widely held, three to a very significant degree, which I do believe establishes notability within her field. This point is further substantiated by editions and reprints (several works with 10-18 releases). Key works supporting this point are topical studies / surveys on aspects of women's and Irish fiction, and a thematic anthology: "Women's fiction between the wars: mothers, daughters, and writing" - held in a remarkable 1410 libraries, "Irish women's fiction: from Edgeworth to Enright" - at 805 libraries, "A history of the Irish short story" - at 669 libraries, and then "Twentieth-century fiction by Irish women: nation and gender" at 280, and "Mothers and daughters in the twentieth century: a literary anthology" at 223. A quick check also shows various of these works on academic course reading lists.SeoR (talk) 21:34, 19 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
1) explain or link academic terms; what, for example, is Kristevan analysis?
2) add thematic summaries before or after each list of works, addressing perspectives of academic work or keybtheses, and the semi-autobiographical tropes in some of the fiction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.220.237.238 (talk) 12:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the suggestions, and I will give it a try. I did notice that the professor uses this "Kristevan anaysis" - apparently a method linked to Julia Kristeva - in multiple papers, so I will see if I can amplify. And I see a need indeed to say more about her interests and methods, but this area of study is not mine, so I must explore a little.Twilson r (talk) 12:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I notice that the editors from the Irish project, and Bathory? and London, have all taken it as read that the papers are covered by the lists in the external sources section. Is this sufficient? I guess so. A decent article, only heard the professor once, but this captures the essence, I feel.80.110.31.59 (talk) 23:33, 20 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
As one of the aforementioned WP Ireland editors, I have added a citation covering even more papers than are listed up to 2015, albeit it does not cover those added by various hands most recently. If I find a reference for those, I will add that too.SeoR (talk) 19:01, 21 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
.jpg){kind=small}
