Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Panos Papasoglu
I am not too familiar with this fiueld so I am refraining from !voting. However, I am worried a bit by some of the arguments brought forward here. As far as I see, whether or not a researcher is notable does not depend ''at all'' on our evaluation of the quality or lack thereof of his work, nor of the quality and standing of the journals that he has published in. We are not the right people to judge those things and that is not what Wikipedia is for. Notability means that someone or someone's work has been noted and has made a notabe impact on the work of others. This can be sourced by showing citation counts or reviews or interviews. Bad researchers can be very notable (e.g. ) and excellent researchers can be non-notable, according to WP's standards. That's how it should be, because we ''can'' judge notability, but should stay away from judging the works quality. By the way, I note that David Eppstein has not yet voted himself and remarked "not exceptional, but not bad " and " I'm not convinced this is enough to show a pass of WP:PROF #1", which is less than a ringing endorsement. I am a bit surprised, therefore, to see some "keep per David" votes
— User:Crusio, 08:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:FRINGE (Wikipedia:Fringe theories)