Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Sadoway
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. --- Deville (Talk) 03:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What is notable about this professor that warrants inclusion? --HResearcher 10:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per nom Leidiot 11:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, I gave no reason for deletion. I know nothing about Donald Sadoway and was wondering about his notibility. In further research I found his resume which is now linked on the article. He seems to be somewhat notable and has made numerous patents. I am going to nominate it for
WEAK KEEP. --HResearcher 11:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply] - Keep --HResearcher 17:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, I gave no reason for deletion. I know nothing about Donald Sadoway and was wondering about his notibility. In further research I found his resume which is now linked on the article. He seems to be somewhat notable and has made numerous patents. I am going to nominate it for
DeleteNo evidence showing this person rises signficantly above average professor (WP:PROF} or patent owner, unless someone verify the special importance of the patents (there are plenty of patent owners who own patents on variations on bits and pieces of industrial processes not encyclopedically notable enough for an article about that person). If they do, I'll change my vote. Oh, and a note to the presumably MITer article authors - this article's writing style & perspective is in pretty poor shape, guys (leaving the notability of the subject aside)... so don't treat that HASS requirement as filler courses... Bwithh 14:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]- Changing my vote to Weak Keep based on Bethlings rewriting, though I stand by my comments about news sources. Bwithh 02:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KeepStrong Keep If you follow the link from the resume you go to the MIT site which has links to the Professor's interviews with such notable and mainstream press as Forbes, Boston Globe, Business Weekly, and Computer World. And these are only the recent interviews with Sadoway. I'm sure an industrious soul could probably mine quite a few more. Agne 20:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Note I'm changing my vote to a "Strong Keep" following the Bethling's rewrite. I think the new research section establishes substantial notability not only for his overall work with batteries but also from an enviromentalist view. As the New Scientist article notes of his recent work "Producing iron by electrolysis rather than conventional smelting could prevent the emission of a billion tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year." Agne 02:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I think a lot of people attribute too much credibility to news coverage. If you look at the articles and the sources on his webpage, the only mainstream source giving substantial coverage (i.e. not just a brief description and quote) is the Boston Globe. But looking at the Boston Globe's "Meeting the Minds" series (which that article belongs to) shows that it is part of that paper's local/regional news science coverage (which includes similar profiles of students)[1]. I don't see sufficient evidence in the news articles on his website for encyclopedic notability. Being described as a "guru" is also not solid, since its a journalese cliche. Bwithh 02:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Google News Archive comes up with a number of articles on this professor's work see [2] He does well on Google Scholar as well. [3] Capitalistroadster 00:54, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know how well Google Scholar does as a measure of academic impact (I know there are more verifiable ways of measuring this, but don't have access to the tools. As for the news article, I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer Bwithh 02:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I tried to cleanup the article by removing the beavercruft and expanding the information on his notablity. As an Alum who didn't really take her HASS classes too seriously, I'd encourage anyone to improve the writing style :) --- The Bethling(Talk) 02:11, 10 September 2006 (UTC
- Weak Keep. -- Aiditor 14:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. His resume lists over a hundred papers, which together with the full professorship, seem enough to retain the article. Espresso Addict 18:14, 13 September 2006 (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.