327:, and doesn't necessarily make them notable. I would see these all as being a great start to a career, without necessarily passing the notability test. (The newspaper mentions, which have been added since the AfD nomination, relate to his high school achievements which don't count under WP:PROF.) The highly-cited paper is probably the strongest argument - string theory isn't my area, and typical numbers vary a lot from field to field, so it's hard to judge where to draw the line here. I thought he was borderline, there certainly seems to be a strong feeling that he's notable! It would certainly improve the article if these matters were covered in it, rather than only being brought up when it's proposed for deletion!
394:
Not sure there's any need for the patronising tone. My WP experience is mostly in WP Physics, rather than trying to be part of the AfD clique... As to the IPhO, I note that we have articles on very few of the other people who have won it over the years!
322:
Comment from nominator: Publishing papers, receiving grants, and even getting tenure at a prestigious university (though not generally considered the strongest physics department in the world!) is what academics
375:
Editors new to the academic AfD pages always have the option of lurking on those pages for a while to familiarise themselves with the standards that prevail there before making further academic prods.
349:: we don't delete articles on people who are notable for something else, merely because they also happen to be a professor. Although in this case as I've argued above it's moot because he also meets
185:
125:
261:
How one decides that a full professor of physics at princeton, perhaps the strongest physics dept. in the world, is a minor academic figure , escapes me entirely.
450:. As thoroughly established above, Gubser is a major figure. String theory isn't my area, either, but even I have heard of this guy, who (along with
209:. Along with the reasons mentioned by Hqb, he has two papers with literally thousands of citations each in Google scholar, and an impressive
479:
423:, then we should start deleting numerous articles there; since performing in plays, movies & on tv is what actors & actresses
92:
87:
96:
17:
79:
431:, we have another area with lots of cruft in needing attention. Simplistic arguments are very often dangerous ones. --
49:
306:
criterion #1 (significant impact in scholarly discipline, broadly construed), and possibly other criteria as well.--
499:
36:
498:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
358:
222:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
451:
484:
459:
440:
404:
384:
362:
336:
315:
289:
272:
253:
226:
200:
196:
175:
141:
61:
427:, that's another topic with lots of cruft in it; & since fighting battles & war is what generals
311:
57:
380:
285:
354:
218:
280:. Has the prodder looked up, as anybody can do easily, the Google Scholar cites for this subject?
132:
Not notable - article is about a minor academic figure, provides no arguments for his notability.
473:
83:
436:
192:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
307:
53:
419:
Hmm. Applying this argument to other subjects, then since writing novels is what novelists
466:
400:
376:
332:
281:
245:
137:
350:
342:
303:
235:
214:
159:
455:
346:
268:
171:
163:
75:
67:
432:
113:
299:
396:
328:
240:
133:
263:
167:
210:
472:
is a better way to go than AfD for articles that need improvement. -
150:. Multiple awards, medals, and notable fellowships; profiles in the
492:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
186:
list of
Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
120:
109:
105:
101:
345:
but they seem in this case to be highly relevant for
341:The high school achievements may be irrelevant for
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
502:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
180:
458:, and a couple of others) discovered the
184:: This debate has been included in the
166:(for his pre-university achievements).
7:
213:of 46, so I think he clearly passes
24:
234:. Highly cited author; passses
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
519:
298:. Per Google scholar hits
485:01:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
441:20:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
405:06:28, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
385:01:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
363:01:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
337:22:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
316:02:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
290:12:39, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
273:08:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
254:15:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
227:13:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
201:13:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
176:13:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
142:12:18, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
62:00:27, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
495:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
158:. Amply satisfies both
460:AdS/CFT correspondence
452:Juan Martín Maldacena
44:The result was
483:
203:
189:
50:non-admin closure
510:
497:
476:
471:
465:
302:. Clearly meets
252:
249:
243:
190:
123:
117:
99:
34:
518:
517:
513:
512:
511:
509:
508:
507:
506:
500:deletion review
493:
482:
469:
463:
247:
241:
239:
119:
90:
74:
71:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
516:
514:
505:
504:
488:
487:
478:
445:
444:
443:
414:
413:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
407:
389:
388:
368:
367:
366:
365:
355:David Eppstein
319:
318:
293:
275:
256:
229:
219:David Eppstein
204:
178:
130:
129:
70:
65:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
515:
503:
501:
496:
490:
489:
486:
481:
475:
474:David Schaich
468:
461:
457:
456:Edward Witten
453:
449:
446:
442:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
418:
417:
416:
415:
406:
402:
398:
393:
392:
391:
390:
386:
382:
378:
374:
373:
372:
371:
370:
369:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
339:
338:
334:
330:
326:
321:
320:
317:
313:
309:
305:
301:
297:
294:
291:
287:
283:
279:
276:
274:
270:
266:
265:
260:
257:
255:
251:
244:
237:
233:
230:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
208:
205:
202:
198:
194:
187:
183:
179:
177:
173:
169:
165:
161:
157:
153:
149:
146:
145:
144:
143:
139:
135:
127:
122:
115:
111:
107:
103:
98:
94:
89:
85:
81:
77:
76:Steven Gubser
73:
72:
69:
68:Steven Gubser
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
494:
491:
447:
428:
424:
420:
324:
295:
277:
262:
258:
231:
206:
193:TexasAndroid
181:
155:
151:
147:
131:
45:
43:
31:
28:
308:Eric Yurken
54:Ron Ritzman
377:Xxanthippe
282:Xxanthippe
448:Snow keep
259:SNOW Keep
156:USA Today
126:View log
433:llywrch
351:WP:PROF
343:WP:PROF
304:WP:PROF
236:WP:PROF
215:WP:PROF
211:h-index
160:WP:PROF
93:protect
88:history
467:Expand
347:WP:BIO
164:WP:BIO
121:delete
97:delete
397:Djr32
329:Djr32
242:Salih
217:#1. —
134:Djr32
124:) – (
114:views
106:watch
102:links
16:<
480:Cont
437:talk
401:talk
381:talk
359:talk
333:talk
312:talk
300:here
296:Keep
286:talk
278:Keep
269:talk
248:talk
238:#1.
232:Keep
223:talk
207:Keep
197:talk
182:Note
172:talk
162:and
154:and
148:Keep
138:talk
110:logs
84:talk
80:edit
58:talk
46:keep
462:.
353:. —
264:DGG
191:--
168:Hqb
152:NYT
48:. (
470:}}
464:{{
454:,
439:)
429:do
425:do
421:do
403:)
383:)
361:)
335:)
325:do
314:)
288:)
271:)
225:)
199:)
188:.
174:)
140:)
112:|
108:|
104:|
100:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
60:)
52:)
477:/
435:(
399:(
387:.
379:(
357:(
331:(
310:(
292:.
284:(
267:(
250:)
246:(
221:(
195:(
170:(
136:(
128:)
118:(
116:)
78:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.