Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Kalinski (2nd nomination)

:{{la|Matt Kalinski}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Matt_Kalinski_(2nd_nomination) Stats])

:({{Find sources|Matt Kalinski}})

No sources apparently. The rather excessive list of external links which were in the article [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Matt_Kalinski&oldid=555010580], do not mention Matt Kalinsky. From google scholar, H-Index is about 7, the calculation in the last AfD was based on adding a biologist in as well. I'm amazed that a BLP with no sources and where no sources were presented during AfD managed to close as no consensus last time, IRWolfie- (talk) 00:31, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Mikemoral♪♫ 02:43, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. —Mikemoral♪♫ 02:43, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

• Delete and salt (for a while). I also find a GS h-index of 7 in a well cited field. Totally inadequate to pass WP:Prof#1. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC).
• Delete. A h-index of 7 (which is also what I calculate) isn't enough for WP:PROF, and we already have the Trojan wave packet article to cover his main research topic. Searching finds nothing else that even remotely suggests notability. Incidentally, I note that his name is actually Maciej Kaliński, and that he no longer seems to be involved with academia. -- 202.124.88.41 (talk) 05:50, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
• Comment. The article claims Kaliński "discovered" Trojan wave packets. The article on that topic doesn't say so, however, and the first (1994) article on the topic ("Lagrange equilibrium points in celestial mechanics and nonspreading wave packets for strongly driven Rydberg electrons") has Kaliński as the middle of three authors. -- 202.124.88.41 (talk) 06:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
• Comment and delete Just to feed you some more bibliometric data. Scopus gives 3 papers by M. Kalinski, with 10 citations in total and h-index=2 (note that Scopus is not the best with pre-1995 papers), whereas Web of Knowledge (ISI, Thomson Reuters) lists 12 papers (Kalinski is the first author of 7 of them), 2 conference communications and 1 reply to the letter-to-editor, with 294 citations in total and h-index=7. I'm not much into physiscs, but I do assume that these aren't extraordinary academic achievments. Rather normal; nothing fancy. Therefore without good, external sources to prove his notability, I see here only a regular PhD, doing a regular science.Masur (talk) 16:14, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
• Delete for lack of evidence of passing WP:PROF. It appears that his discovery, Trojan wave packets, is notable, but its notability does not automatically pass to him per WP:NOTINHERITED, especially because it was work done while he was a student and it is difficult to disentangle his contribution from that of his advisor and more notable coauthor Joseph H. Eberly. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

::Not to mention the contributions of his coauthor Iwo Bialynicki-Birula, who was first author of that 1994 paper cited above. That was the paper which actually defined the concept, and which assigned the name when it stated "Such nonspreading wave packets are direct quantum analogs of the clusters of Trojan asteroids orbiting the Sun near the stable Lagrange points L4 and L5." It's clear that Kalinski contributed to the topic during his PhD, but it does not seem that he "discovered" it. -- 203.171.196.24 (talk) 07:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

• Keep Matt Kalinski cannot pass WP:PROF in that sense and he works privately. He entered the US on student visa F-1 with Polish passport. This visa implies that he had to leave US to Poland 10 day after graduation. Poland however requires that all Professors have to have President of Poland nomination. US PhD cannot be under Polish President and he must work privately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattedia (talk • contribs) 07:09, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

::I'm not sure what that means, but certainly he is working privately, in some capacity that doesn't seem to be generating further publications. -- 203.171.196.24 (talk) 07:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

::And I'm really hoping you're not Matt Kalinski (WP:AUTO). -- 203.171.196.24 (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

:::As well as the possible conflict-of-interest, I'm confused by Mattedia's comment, because it is labeled keep but it seems to be arguing that he is not notable. In any case it is certainly possible for people not employed as academics to pass WP:PROF. I could cite examples but I think that would be a distraction. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:11, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

::::Certainly it is possible for people not employed as academics to pass WP:PROF (except #5 and #6), but the dearth of Google hits suggests that Kalinski is not currently employed in any WP:PROF-passing way. All we have to go on are his existing publications, which seem to me insufficient. -- 202.124.73.20 (talk) 02:22, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

• Delete: Lack of substantial coverage in reliable independent secondary sources. No evidence that subject meets the requirements of any notability guideline, especially WP:PROF. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 10:40, 5 July 2013 (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.