Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Owen Fenton

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 delete. plicit 12:37, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Owen Fenton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Assistant prof with a patent, not convinced passes WP:NPROF. Maybe WP:TOOSOON. Kj cheetham (talk) 12:11, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, TOOSOON. I looked at his 52 coauthors on Scopus with 7+ papers who hold or have held research positions beyond postdoc (but including senior scientists in industry even though many of them did not do postdocs). Here are the results:
Total citations: average: 10429, median: 2800, Fenton: 1716.
Total papers: avg: 115, med: 36, F: 27.
h-index: avg: 33, med: 21, F: 17.
Top 5 paper citations: 1st: avg: 988, med: 312, F: 261. 2nd: avg: 535, med: 261, F: 239. 3rd: avg: 356, med: 245, F: 230. 4th: avg: 309, med: 236, F: 210. 5th: avg: 266, med: 158, F: 111.
He has a promising career, but at the moment he does not have a citation profile putting him well above the "average professor" in his subfield. JoelleJay (talk) 19:32, 8 November 2021 (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.