This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia This redirect 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 redirect is supported by the science and academia work group. Science This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science 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.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles Photography This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography 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.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles Physics: Biographies This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles This redirect is supported by Biographies Taskforce.

@ Bitelz: In order to make this article be accepted, I removed all self-published sources and things and science aggregators like Reseearch Gate. I removed all facts that are not found in secondary external publications as it should be. In Wikipedia we take very seriously the WP:BLP. I also reformatted some reference. Hope it helps! ReyHahn ( talk) 15:53, 5 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Sounds good, thank you! Can you let me know if I should add more references to meet the acceptance requirements? For example, what is a good source to quote for research papers (other than science aggregators)? Bitelz ( talk) 16:24, 5 September 2023 (UTC) reply

It is unfortunate that the article is still insufificient. As I said WP:BLP is important. Science aggregators are a no. The best is to have GOOD secondary sources that review his research.-- ReyHahn ( talk) 14:01, 23 September 2023 (UTC) reply