Talk:Carl Rhodes

Comments left by AfC reviewers

• Comment: this is promotional CV like content that is copying some sources Czarking0 (talk) 04:53, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: May be notable as an academic, but existing references do not show significant coverage about Rhodes in reliable independent secondary sources - lots of work by him, plus some routine employer, institutional and publication profiles, but no SIGCOV. What about reviews of his books, for example? Paul W (talk) 08:11, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Puff

This appears to be a WP:BLP mainly produced by one single-topic editor with few other edits on WP. 'Nuff said.

Nobody seems to have said much about this chap. Having an article published in The Sydney Morning Herald is all very well and that journal looks good in the list of sources, but the SMH itself didn't say anything about him.

Primarily this article looks to be a list of publications, a list of articles published in WP:RS, links to various organisation lists of staff or participants, and not a real lot about how notable the subject is outside academia. For example, we have "Rhodes has contributed commentary and analysis to Australian and international media outlets, including ( … )" but nobody has actually said this anywhere outside WP. It is us declaring this in Wikivoice, as if we have some corporate authority.

The list of "Selected Works" (which I dare say is all of them) is longer than the rest of the article, which in itself is pretty much a list of things written by the subject, with the occasional mention on a contributor list by the publisher. It is very thin stuff.

Surely if the subject is notable, it shouldn't be difficult to find someone in a reliable source saying so?

Nothing against the subject themselves, who appears to be a useful part of society, and has held various non-trivial academic positions, but the whole article appears to be confected for the sole purpose of actually having a Wikipedia article. There have been several previous attempts to get this included and it looks like the last one somehow managed to tick enough boxes to hang on for more than a day. Gamification, much? --Pete (talk) 16:32, 25 June 2026 (UTC)