Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Axel Schumacher

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. Stifle (talk) 09:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Axel Schumacher[edit]

This person is not notable. Article reads like an autobiographical sketch of a non-notable geneticist. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 20:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as per nom. RockManQ (talk) 23:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete sort of an interesting person, but fails WP:PROF as non notable. Jenafalt (talk) 08:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This article was started by anonymous user 65.95.123.194 and the only edits from this user, all in 2005, are on this particular article. WHOIS indicates the city of Toronto, which is the same city where the subject of the article worked from 2003-2005, according to a recent CV. Agricola44 (talk) 16:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A good scientist but still a fairly junior one. PhD 2002, was a postdoc until 2004 according to the CV linked above. I was able to verify the info re the NSARD Young Investigator award which he did receive in 2004[1][2]. However, this a junior scientist award which does not yet show academic notability. I was unable to verify the Michael Smith Award mentioned in the article. This does appear to be a prestigious award given by NSERC in Canada for public promotion of science. The current list of recepients[3] and the list of past winners[4](which I checked year by year) do not contain his name. Unless I missed something or there is another Michael Smith Award, this award claim does not check out. The record of citation of his work in googleScholar is OK[5] but not yet in the notable range. H-index is about 7. Does not pass WP:PROF for the moment. Nsk92 (talk) 00:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not yet notable enough. rootology (C)(T) 05:56, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete I verified in Scopus rather than ISI, somewhat fuller coverage better for European academics: I find 18 papers with the maximum citations being 52, 24, 21. h=8 The 3 most cited, but not all, were published in first rate journals. Probably not yet notable. That most cited paper, though, is a methods review paper-- such papers tend to get disproportionately cited. Probably not yet notable. DGG (talk) 03:10, 2 September 2008 (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.