Deletion of Ben Britton

Comment: He seems to meets  #1 (high citation rate), #2 (the IOM3 Silver medal), and #3 (Fellowship of the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (FIMMM), which "is an award granted to individuals that the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining (IOM3), judges to have made “significant contribution or established a record of achievement in the materials, minerals, mining
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC)

Comment: Note conflict of interest, as above - I am the subject of the article which the AfD discusses) On citation metrics vs downloads, my citations can be accessed easily via Google scholar (there is a link in the primary article, and note I have been independent of my supervisor since 2012 when I started at Imperial). On the use of Downloads vs Citations, this is an active area of discussion in the responsible metrics community. I include the downloads in my list as an extra 'flavour' in the portfolio assessment as there is a positive correlation, as per Watson (Journal of Vision, 2009 - https://jov.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2193506). There are also "strong correlations between citations and download frequency when absolute values are used" (ref Schloegl and Gorraiz https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/asi.21420, as referenced in https://www.researchtrends.com/issue-37-june-2014/downloads-versus-citations-and-the-role-of-publication-language/ - but note that the correlation is weaker when an individual paper is used). In terms of external comment on this use of citations and the assessment of researchers, you can find lots of discussion on this via the #ResponsibleMetrics tag on twitter for instance and https://sfdora.org/ (which is discussed by Wellcome https://wellcome.ac.uk/news/how-we-judge-research-outputs-when-making-funding-decisions and DORA has been signed up to by the UK research councils https://timeshighereducation.com/news/funding-councils-sign-responsible-research-assessment). However, you can see in comments here that citations are being used to assess #C1
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Looks like a pass of #C1 to me https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Py3Jx9sAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao. I'm not sure if his Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining|IOM3 Fellowship is selective/prestigious enough to count for #C3, but it doesn't hurt. In addition, he appears to be something of a quotable source for expert opinion on nuclear energy http://www.globalconstructionreview.com/sectors/expert-opinion-deeply-div7ided-c7ase-hin7kley/https://www.theengineer.co.uk/building-a-future-career-prospects-in-civil-engineering/http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Costs-will-dictate-future-of-UK-nuclear,-says-univ, maybe not enough so for a slam-dunk pass of #C7, but again, leaning in that direction. While I see the possibility for a COI in principle, the article that we have now does not itself appear problematic to me
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:PROF||WP:PROF)

Comment: The original article was a vanity piece created by a conflicted editor, and her continued involvement hasn't helped, but he's on the verge of meeting  (based largely on the IOM3 silver medal: the FIMM is far too low level to count for anything) and will clearly pass it at some point in the next few years
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC)

Comment: Thank you for your comments. On the subject of publication metrics, Wikipedia does rely upon citation counts (and indices derived from them) more than upon download figures.  Of course, citation counts are a coarse indicator with recognized flaws; to mention one issue that has arisen repeatedly, pure mathematicians can have quite low numbers while still being highly influential in their field. Our |notability guideline for scholars and academics mitigates (imperfectly) these shortcomings by making publication metrics only one of several paths to notability. To see how the guideline is applied in practice, perusing Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators/archive 2|the archive may be instructive. In fact, this is one aspect of the "sausage factory" that I've never seen addressed very well by the outside press
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: I have to admit, I am somewhat swayed by the IOM3 fellowship #C3, and citations are high #C1
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:PROF)