Deletion of Thomas Crowther (ecologist)

Comment: I am still on the fence a bit. There are many references, good ones. But notability is what others write about the subject, not what the subject writes about. The mainstream media references are all about his 2015 study, which is a little . The study itself is definitely notable, and while notoriety is not inherited, I think he meets criteria for being the lead author
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SINGLEEVENT)

Comment: I would also consider the above coverage to be in excess of “routine”. The mainstream media do not typically cover ecological research or researchers, but Crowther is at the forefront of his field, and clearly driving the climate change debate in this area. Whilst there is a lot of public coverage of Crowther at the time of his research publications, he is also regarded as a “climate change expert” and has been requested to comment on major global events over a consistent period of time. This includes being quoted by newspapers on: the outcomes from COP21 (the BBC), the decision of Donald Trump to pull out of the Paris agreement (the Independent), and the decision to lift the US coal moratorium (the Independent). The article has been updated to include his quotes on these global issues. As covered in the first draft of this article he was also included as a climate change expert in the creation of the ‘Clean Air Rule’. These quotations in mainstream national media directly satisfy the notability guidance for academics, as stated in the  notability guidelines for criterion 7
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SCHOLAR)

Comment: As the science advisor to the UN's Billion Tree Campaign his research and the story of his academic life has also been included within a children’s textbook https://issuu.com/plant-for-the-planet/docs/bfb_engl_gesamt, which is distributed to all of Plant-for-the-Planet’s youth ambassadors (of which there are over 100,000 https://www.plant-for-the-planet.org/en/about-us/structure. This emphasises that his research fulfils  notability guidelines criterion 7 (having a substantial impact outside academia
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SCHOLAR)

Comment: with the above updates, the article meets the |general notability guideline and specifically addresses the  notability guidelines.  —&nbsp;Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:SCHOLAR)

Comment: In terms of reliability and independence, all information included in the article is published by established outlets (as listed above). I have updated the article to include citations of his peer reviewed research. In addition, I have included references to a citation index which show it is in the top 5% of research for impact (and the 99th percentile for researchers of his age) to demonstrate that this research is at the forefront of its field https://nature.altmetric.com/details/14191295/news https://www.altmetric.com/details/4464950. I have also now updated the article to include citations from secondary sources. These include academic review articles (which summarise the most significant, up to date research in this area and reference his work e.g. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/jgs/article-abstract/175/5/716/532080/the-deep-history-of-earth-s-biomass?redirectedFrom=fulltext as well as textbooks which directly reference Prof. Crowther’s work https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780128127667/soil-carbon-storage. These both fulfil the requirements in the  notability guidelines for criterion 1
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SCHOLAR)