Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Navin J. Manjooran

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. ✗plicit 11:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Navin J. Manjooran[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not clear that they meet WP:PROF and if being a Fellow of the ASM is sufficient to meet WP:PROF #3 but worth discussing. Board memberships do not appear sufficient for notability. Citation numbers in Google Scholar are not high enough. Gusfriend (talk) 09:37, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Gusfriend (talk) 09:37, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:16, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep WP:NPROF#3 seems to be the only possible criteria under which they are notable from what I can see. Looking at https://www.asminternational.org/membership/awards/asm-fellows it's clear being a Fellow is a selective honour and not just a membership grade anyone can apply for. I'm only saying weak as I'm not overly familar with ASM International, but it seems to be reputable. -Kj cheetham (talk) 14:00, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Other institutions with staff who become ASM International fellows thought it meritied publicity at least, e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], etc. So whilst they are not exactly independant sources, it indicates to me there is some level of prestiege. -Kj cheetham (talk) 22:00, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Kj cheetham, universities will run with anything, on the websites and on social media, from volunteering at an animal shelter to (passive) attendance at a workshop. Drmies (talk) 14:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - That's fair. I'd imagine some government labs might be slightly more selective ([8],[9],[10],[11],[12],[13],[14],[15]), or at least .mil domains ([16],[17]). Companies are probably keen to promote any awards I admit ([18],[19],[20]), but there's at least one international mention too ([21]). -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This began as a copyright violation, and ought to have been speedy deleted as such at inception. It's since been rewritten by sockpuppets of the original WP:COI account. Disruptive and promotional edit history aside, the ASM fellowship looks like a pretty thin hook upon which to hang notability. As an aside, ASM International (society) is also a WP:COI piece with promotional issues. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:71F0 (talk) 15:43, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete since serious secondary sourcing is required not just for the very fact of the fellowship, but also to prove that the organization is "highly selective and prestigious". Drmies (talk) 21:11, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I think https://www.asminternational.org/2020-fellows is sufficient to show the fellowship (WP:PRIMARYNOTBAD), but agree would need secondary sourcing for the latter part of your argument. -Kj cheetham (talk) 21:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  More specifically WP:PROF says that For documenting that a person has been elected member or fellow (but not for a judgement of whether or not that membership/fellowship is prestigious), publications of the electing institution are considered a reliable source. Gusfriend (talk) 21:56, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please see, and contribute to if you have evidence, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Brianbrian365. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:52, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I usually defer to DGG's expertise in accepting drafts for academics. In this case I disagree. I do not feel that the quality of the subject's work confers notability. I am concerned about the COI edits and the sockpuppetry. Patents do not confer notability. I can apply for a patent as can anyone. I am not persuaded that Manjooran passes WP:NPROF 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not convinced one way or the other whether Fellow of the ASM is a highly selective honor. In the absence of a clear-cut indication in that regard, and without any indications that other wiki-notability criteria are met, I think cleaning up COI editing is more important. XOR'easter (talk) 18:25, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.