- 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.
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 20:33, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Nicholas Weise ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm not seeing sufficient notability for this researcher. He is a lecturer with a reasonable but not exceptional number of publications, won one university-internal non-funded award (of which a bunch seem to be given [1]) and was nominated for two more, and did some outreach. This doesn't get us to either GNG or NPROF level. Newish academic (PhD 7 years ago) at the beginning of his career; WP:TOOSOON. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 18:56, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 18:56, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:06, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete WP:NOTCV. At best WP:TNT but i doubt WP:ACADEMIC is met. — siro χ o 22:13, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. He has a promising Google Scholar citation record, but not a strong enough one to convince me of a pass of WP:PROF#C1. And local awards that are not even university-wide, but only from his faculty within his university, with 10 winners/year, are far from the level of significance that could contribute to #C2. — David Eppstein ( talk) 00:35, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
- 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.
The result was delete. Joyous! Noise! 20:33, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Nicholas Weise ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm not seeing sufficient notability for this researcher. He is a lecturer with a reasonable but not exceptional number of publications, won one university-internal non-funded award (of which a bunch seem to be given [1]) and was nominated for two more, and did some outreach. This doesn't get us to either GNG or NPROF level. Newish academic (PhD 7 years ago) at the beginning of his career; WP:TOOSOON. -- Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 18:56, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Elmidae ( talk · contribs) 18:56, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Hey man im josh ( talk) 19:06, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete WP:NOTCV. At best WP:TNT but i doubt WP:ACADEMIC is met. — siro χ o 22:13, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. He has a promising Google Scholar citation record, but not a strong enough one to convince me of a pass of WP:PROF#C1. And local awards that are not even university-wide, but only from his faculty within his university, with 10 winners/year, are far from the level of significance that could contribute to #C2. — David Eppstein ( talk) 00:35, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
- 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.