| Revision as of 01:00, 1 February 2007 editIRelayer (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,052 edits →[]← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:24, 1 February 2007 edit undoCindery (talk | contribs)3,807 edits on the notability of lawsuit plaintiffsNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| *'''Weak keep or Merge'''Tag the page for cleanup, sourcing, and NPOV, or merge racial discrimination info with ] Also, vanity is not itself a valid reason for deletion.--IRelayer 01:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC) | *'''Weak keep or Merge'''Tag the page for cleanup, sourcing, and NPOV, or merge racial discrimination info with ] Also, vanity is not itself a valid reason for deletion.--IRelayer 01:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| **Comment: there aren't sources for the notability of Chander himself as a scientist--his pubmed citations don't place him above "average college professor." The implied notability seems to come from the lawsuit--and not very plaintiff in a lawsuit is inherently notable. In fact, few are. In this case, the damages were extemely low--$5,000--and it's not the only discrimination lawsuit in the history of the world (or Canada). It didn't get more than local mention, it appears. When are plaintiffs notable?--We do not have an article on the woman who received a 4.5 million dollar settlement for the Dalkon Shield, for example (nor would we call her a "human rights activist"). The article appears to have been written by a relative. I don't think mention should be in NRC, either, per due weight. A sentence or two could perhaps be merged into an article about Canadian discrimination lawsuits or something, if one exists.-] 01:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:24, 1 February 2007
Chander P. Grover
- Chander P. Grover (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
notability questionable/possible author vanity/COI
- Weak keep or MergeTag the page for cleanup, sourcing, and NPOV, or merge racial discrimination info with National Research Council of Canada Also, vanity is not itself a valid reason for deletion.--IRelayer 01:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: there aren't sources for the notability of Chander himself as a scientist--his pubmed citations don't place him above "average college professor." The implied notability seems to come from the lawsuit--and not very plaintiff in a lawsuit is inherently notable. In fact, few are. In this case, the damages were extemely low--$5,000--and it's not the only discrimination lawsuit in the history of the world (or Canada). It didn't get more than local mention, it appears. When are plaintiffs notable?--We do not have an article on the woman who received a 4.5 million dollar settlement for the Dalkon Shield, for example (nor would we call her a "human rights activist"). The article appears to have been written by a relative. I don't think mention should be in NRC, either, per due weight. A sentence or two could perhaps be merged into an article about Canadian discrimination lawsuits or something, if one exists.-Cindery 01:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)