Deletion of Alexey Gorshkov

Comment: I spent considerable time on this one, scratching my head, doing google searches with various combinations, rethinking things. My sense is, if there is a Wikipedia for physics, he belongs there. Clearly he is a productive academic, with numerous well-cited papers (although most citations list him as one of many academics.) The article in its current form is almost all |primary research, discussing his papers, his findings, and as such constitutes |original research. So, essentially, the article is a CV, a resume. What we really need here in Wikipedia is a |secondary source to examine his work, discuss it in detail, explain what it means, how it affects people, and after looking through ten SERP pages, I did not find that. That does not mean it does not exist, but that's what we need: write-ups in ''Popular Science'', mainstream newspapers, ''Discover magazine'', with sharp science writers making sense of it, or other physicists discussing his work, so that people such as myself can begin to grasp it, to help the topic meet the |general notability guideline. When this happens, we can write an article which says subject X is notable for ... and be able to write something other than he cranked out 100+ papers with many other physicists. Reluctantly, I vote delete, but in future, I hope to see this subject back in Wikipedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PRIMARY||WP:OR||WP:SECONDARY||WP:GNG)