This article was nominated for deletion on 6 December 2024. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: His h-factor is weak and the awards listed are routine, so do not contribute to notability.

Ldm1954 (talk) 14:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

-he has been awarded a distinguished chair at Caltech, the Mary and Charles Ferkel Professor at Caltech

-he has been appointed as an Investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute

-he has made substantial contributions to the nucleocytoplasmic transport field. JenniferconnellyII (talk) 23:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but none of these pass WP:NPROF. Like many other R1 universities Caltech has been good at funding named chairs, that is not enough. I dont see being an investigator as notable. Last, his citations do not prove your claim of substantial contributions.

It was highly inappropriate to remove the notability tag and I also reverted the COI tag you removed. As a new user I realise that you have to learn how Wikipedia works. If you have questions ask, don't just remove. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JenniferconnellyII, please read pages such as WP:NPP to understand why this page had tags added, also WP:TAGGING. Quite serious is WP:COI, in Wikipedia this is taken very seriosly. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ldm1954: I service the cat:nn category and have been a long-time NPP/AFC reviewer. A rough guide to whether a professor is notable is if they have more 5 papers with more than 100 citations in each, which is the case here. This can be seen in the Google Scholar page [1]. Stuff like awards, external activities like sitting on comittees, being editor of a book series, writing a series of monographs and so on add to notability. The reason I posted this, is that there was more than 900 articles with notability tags put on last month, so need to be more work done by editors. I've removed the tag. scope_creep^Talk 07:40, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I completely disagree with your statements, and they are also contrary to what is now commonly discussed at WT:NPROF or in WP:NPROF. There is nothing in WP:NPROF about committees, or being an editor. Also, if you look carefully at recent discussions such as https://teknopedia.ac.id/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mark_Kotter and in WT:NPROF, 100 cites is only for low citation areas such as math. He is in a high citation field, so you have to compare him to others in the area, please compare him to others in his categories at https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=R9Ho8_8AAAAJ&hl=en. You are missing a "0" in your citation counting, sorry.

I typically tag to give the editor a chance to work with me to improve, find additional awards etc or in some cases change to a different notability class. Otherwise it is AfD. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep there was recently a good discussion on how to use citations for #C1 at Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics)/Archive 15. The concensus is compare, compare, compare Ldm1954 (talk) 08:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, but I think it will need to go Afd to settle it. scope_creep^Talk 21:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]