Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan C. Gianneschi

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|Nathan C. Gianneschi}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nathan_C._Gianneschi Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Nathan C. Gianneschi}})

None notable scientist, was pointed out when article was in draft space. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EvilxFish (talk • contribs) 12:52, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

• Keep. As the Jacob & Rosaline Cohn Professor of Chemistry, Materials Science & Engineering, and Biomedical Engineering at Northwestern University, the subject meets notability criteria established at WP:PROF. ("5. The person has held a named chair appointment or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research.") -- Edgar181 (Edgar181) 13:02, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

• Keep. In addition to the C5 case pointed out by Ed, he also looks like a likely pass of WP:NPROF C1 based on citations. I note that the page originator should've declared a COI as a grad student of the article subject. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 15:30, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Keep - per edgar — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:08, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Keep. Clear pass of WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:53, 24 November 2019 (UTC).
• Comment WP:PROF does appear to be satisfied. But I think that WP:PROF is giving a free ride for a lot of articles without any satisfaction of WP:GNG. I would expect that some other people should have written about the subject or their work. Currently none of the references here show notability in the WP:GNG sense. So WP:PROF should be rewritten, and thousands of articles on academics should then be deleted because they have had no impact. That opinion however has not been checked against this subject. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:57, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

::I take that as a keep. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:30, 24 November 2019 (UTC).

::Graeme Bartlett, NPROF exists exactly to write about people who are influential/have impact in the world of ideas. The current subject's articles have been cited over 4000 times. That's 4000 people writing about this work, though of course many of those mentions may be glancing. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 07:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

:::So then the article should be including some of those citations that include substantial coverage. My comment is not keep or delete. However I will say when I edited the article I did not feel the urge to tag it for lack of notability or deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:36, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

• Speedy keep Passes WP:PROF#C5 for holding a named chair, and probably passes on other points as well since people don't get named chairs unless they've done something. XOR'easter (talk) 14:16, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
• Delete. This isn't a wiki article, this is an advert. It tells us next to nothing about his life or work, there is no biography, all we're informed of is his possition, titles and awards.--Project Osprey (talk) 20:58, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

::This BLP is commendably short. I wish others were the same. But if you wish to expand it please do. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:30, 24 November 2019 (UTC).

:::I wish to delete it, and we don't normally commend articles for being 3 lines long.--Project Osprey (talk) 21:54, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

• Keep - based on my reading of hundreds of such stubs, this almost certainly this was written by a grad student of his. That having been said, it's not terrible, brevity being its saving grace, and as a named chair in major research university and 4,000 cites, he passes PROF. Bearian (talk) 02:44, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
• Keep. Yes, grad students shouldn't write about their advisors, but he passes WP:PROF. I forget whether FRSC is one of the selective ones enough for #C3 but it doesn't matter when we also have C1 and C5. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:02, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
• Keep. Prof Snow. Lightburst (talk) 21:08, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
• Keep named chairs are very selective. While they are becoming more common now, they have historically been limited and still are very limited. The professor guidelines exist because professors make major impacts without getting the type of gishing press athletes get. I think it is a much worse problem that playing a few minutes in certain soccer games gives notability than that all holders of named academic chairs get notability. Actually, not all named chairs will default give notability, they have to be given selectively to top ranked professors. However at a place like Northwestern they do clearly confer notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:59, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.