Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luboš Motl (4th nomination)
I agree with {{u|XOR&#39;easter}} that the spirit of |special notability criteria for academics is not to include everyone who has a seemingly high number of citations in their publications, it's to recognize people who are notably influential in their field. On its own, the number of citations is of limited use. Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)#Notes|An important note in the criteria is that {{tq|Citation measures such as the h-index, g-index, etc., are of limited usefulness in evaluating whether Criterion 1 is satisfied. They should be approached with caution because their validity is not, at present, completely accepted, and they may depend substantially on the citation database used.}} And yet these very metrics are being used as the basis for retaining this article. XOR's comments also suggest this level of citation is not particularly remarkable in this field. I was concerned that that the NYT article was the only source providing substantive coverage of Motl, but the context around the interviews from Czech sources and pattern of recognition of his expertise between The Econonmist, РИА Новости, and other sources above suggest this should be retained
— User:I, 19:38, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:PROF (Wikipedia:Notability)