Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John E. Lisman Memorial Lecture in Vision Science

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 merge to John E. Lisman. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 09:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John E. Lisman Memorial Lecture in Vision Science[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)

Article topic is an annual lecture. All sources provided are internal to Brandeis and a search shows up nothing in independent sources. Mccapra (talk) 20:43, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 20:43, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 20:43, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 20:43, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 20:43, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not even close to notable. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:48, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is a major award in vision sciences. Many recipients have the fact that they won this award in their biographies and it is included on several of their Wikipedia pages. I have added valid references from outside Brandeis University. I have also made it clearer in the text that it is an award, coupled with a lecture. The title of the award, by donor decree, is "John E. Lisman Memorial Lecture in Vision Science" but it is an award. The award changed names on the death of John Lisman to honor him, but this was only 3 years ago, and the 2020 award delivery was impacted by COVID-19; you may google "Pepose Award in Vision Sciences" for a longer history. The change of name is noted in the article. Stevevanhooser (talk) 00:12, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sourcing is decent for a specialist award. Alternatively, it looks like John Lisman himself would be notable by WP:PROF (strong citation record, holder of a named chair, an obituary in Nature). The article could be repurposed into a biography of Lisman, with the current material becoming part of a "Legacy" section. XOR'easter (talk) 01:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment John Lisman would be a good subject for an article IMHO. However, merging this award with a personal page on Lisman might be suboptimal because the award had a history before it was named for Lisman (Pepose Award in Vision Sciences). Stevevanhooser (talk) 20:44, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into John E. Lisman. ~~It may be a redlink now but I will work on it.~~ Stevevanhooser is right, I believe the subject meets WP:ACADEMIC and that this award should be merged into that article, which I have just started. Ifnord (talk) 16:59, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:05, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 17:10, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect. As said before, referencing looks okay. If the subject person alone didn't warrant a separate article I'd be saying keep this one. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:38, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:20, 7 July 2020 (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.