This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Randykitty (talk | contribs) at 13:29, 27 January 2015 (→Michael Viscardi: pot and kettle). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 13:29, 27 January 2015 by Randykitty (talk | contribs) (→Michael Viscardi: pot and kettle)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Michael Viscardi
AfDs for this article:- Michael Viscardi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Clearly fails WP:PROF Markgall12 (talk) 20:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This page has been nominated twice before. However, I believe it is rather clear-cut that the subject does not meet the criteria of WP:PROF. It is explicitly stated in the guideline that "Victories in academic student competitions at the high school and university level as well as other awards and honors for academic student achievements (at either high school, undergraduate or graduate level) do not qualify under Criterion 2 and do not count towards partially satisfying Criterion 1."
Everything in the first paragraph is related to high-school and college level prizes. The "2010 Hoopes Prize" is non-noteworthy, as the prize is given to dozens of students every year, and often several in math alone. The results proved to win these prizes simply have not had "significant impact in their scholarly discipline". They appeared in a fairly low-ranked journal and have been cited all of 9 times in the last 7 years. Markgall12 (talk) 20:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—Talk to my owner:Online 20:38, 26 January 2015 (UTC)- AfD formatting
Fixed. NORTH AMERICA 20:53, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 20:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 20:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 20:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep News sources said he is notable, not low impact scholarly journals, and you joined Misplaced Pages just to nominate him for deletion, so his article is not too obscure, it seems. MicroPaLeo (talk) 21:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- The articles say that he won prizes as a high schooler/undergrad, which are explicitly excluded per WP:PROF. Which of the 9 criteria in the notability standards do you feel are met?
- I have many more edits from another account, but am not using it for this. Not that it's relevant. --Markgall12 (talk) 22:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- The same ones that the Seattle Times, USA Today, and ABC News think are met.
- I thought you could only have one Misplaced Pages account, can I create a second one for deletion discussions, also, is that correct? How can anyone tell if you voted twice in the same discussion, then? MicroPaLeo (talk) 22:21, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- All of these sources note that he won various prizes for a high schooler. It is extremely explicit that these awards do not meet notability criteria. --Markgall12 (talk) 22:26, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hmm, I don't know the account rules. Maybe I will be banned, so I'll refrain from voting. But it is pretty clear from the standards that this article is non-notable. --Markgall12 (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think you should withdraw the nomination. I asked at the Teahouse and read a link they provided, and it says, "Editing project space: Undisclosed alternative accounts are not to be used in discussions internal to the project." It seems you were not allowed to start the discussion. Why is the deletion so important to you that you created a sock puppet account to get rid of the article, you might ask. There are many marginally notable people on Misplaced Pages. In this case, three major news sources decided he was notable enough to write about, so why should we second guess them? That is what Misplaced Pages's notability policies are really about, let outside sources decide notability rather than Misplaced Pages editors. MicroPaLeo (talk) 23:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- @MicroPaLeo:, looking at your own editing record, I don't have the definite impression that this is your first account either... --Randykitty (talk) 13:29, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think you should withdraw the nomination. I asked at the Teahouse and read a link they provided, and it says, "Editing project space: Undisclosed alternative accounts are not to be used in discussions internal to the project." It seems you were not allowed to start the discussion. Why is the deletion so important to you that you created a sock puppet account to get rid of the article, you might ask. There are many marginally notable people on Misplaced Pages. In this case, three major news sources decided he was notable enough to write about, so why should we second guess them? That is what Misplaced Pages's notability policies are really about, let outside sources decide notability rather than Misplaced Pages editors. MicroPaLeo (talk) 23:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Certainly fails WP:PROF (student awards do not satisfy those guidelines), and as yet has a low h-index. However, there is considerable news coverage of the prize, which probably satisfies WP:GNG. -- 120.23.174.141 (talk) 04:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)