The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
I might be missing something here but unable to identify how said subject passes
WP:NPROF. Surely having one publication with over 2000+ citations and the rest 80< is not indicative of an automatic pass of
WP:NPROF. Cannot see any appointments that would qualify either. No
WP:GNG pass either.
nearlyevil66521:06, 28 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete I notice this was passed out of AFC by
Ts12rAc (who has a lot more passes than fails, which I also find strange and worrisome) but to keep it short, I was about to do the same thing as the nom, for the same reasons.
Dennis Brown -
2¢21:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Also note that the person who reverted out the autobiography template (
Francisfycollins, an spa) claims to be the author but not the subject, even though the history says otherwise (
Asphodel76 also spa), and I've left a note explaining
WP:scrutiny on their talk page. Not sure what is going on there.
Dennis Brown -
2¢21:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete. Only one highly-cited paper, in which they are in a middle position among 10 authors, is definitely not enough by itself for
WP:PROF#C1, and there seems to be nothing else. Assistant professors are usually not yet notable and I think this bears out the rule. I didn't consider the odd behavior discussed above in reaching this conclusion, but it also seems worthy of additional investigation. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
01:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete as the current article is promotional and the subject likely fails
WP:NPROF with a modest h-index of 20 and less than 1000 citations when we disregard the one COVID 19 article. --
hroest00:55, 31 March 2022 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
I might be missing something here but unable to identify how said subject passes
WP:NPROF. Surely having one publication with over 2000+ citations and the rest 80< is not indicative of an automatic pass of
WP:NPROF. Cannot see any appointments that would qualify either. No
WP:GNG pass either.
nearlyevil66521:06, 28 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete I notice this was passed out of AFC by
Ts12rAc (who has a lot more passes than fails, which I also find strange and worrisome) but to keep it short, I was about to do the same thing as the nom, for the same reasons.
Dennis Brown -
2¢21:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Also note that the person who reverted out the autobiography template (
Francisfycollins, an spa) claims to be the author but not the subject, even though the history says otherwise (
Asphodel76 also spa), and I've left a note explaining
WP:scrutiny on their talk page. Not sure what is going on there.
Dennis Brown -
2¢21:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete. Only one highly-cited paper, in which they are in a middle position among 10 authors, is definitely not enough by itself for
WP:PROF#C1, and there seems to be nothing else. Assistant professors are usually not yet notable and I think this bears out the rule. I didn't consider the odd behavior discussed above in reaching this conclusion, but it also seems worthy of additional investigation. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
01:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete as the current article is promotional and the subject likely fails
WP:NPROF with a modest h-index of 20 and less than 1000 citations when we disregard the one COVID 19 article. --
hroest00:55, 31 March 2022 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.