Draft talk:Payam A. Gammage

Notability criteria
Thank you for all the constructive feedback. I hope what is written below is a helpful addition.

For WP:THREE, I believe the best examples are:

For Science publishing coverage: References 5-7 are the most high profile discussions of the subject’s work to fulfil the notability criteria.

For wider press coverage: References 8 (national science podcast broadcast on British radio), 12 and 19 are good examples of high profile discussions of the subject’s work to fulfil the notability criteria.

I believe this article satisifes criteria 1a and 1e of the notability criteria for WP:NACADEMIC

1a - several of the manuscripts authored by this person have received more than 200 scholarly citations (Google Scholar) - including those with significant media coverage (for example, references 2 and 3). I believe these also satisfy the WP:SIGCOV criteria with secondary, independent coverage of these developments in highly reliable and reputable sources such as Science Magazine (5), Nature Reviews Drug Discovery (6) and Cell (7) as written above.

1e - this person was awarded 3 highly selective international fellowships/awards:

1) The ERC starting grant (a pan-european competitive fellowship, widely recognised as the most competitive fellowship in europe) - reference 19

2) The R37 MERIT award from the NIH National Cancer Institute, USA - this is a highly prestigious award in the USA for cancer researchers, and there are fewer than 10 known recipients of this award outside of the USA.

3) EMBO Young Investigator Award - this is the most competitive award available in Europe, where the competition is held annually across all life science disciplines, with typically twenty or fewer recipients across all fields annually. Many former awardees are now among the most celebrated scientists in Europe. It is on par with the MacArthur awards - reference 20

PAG2020 (talk) 15:15, 8 July 2024 (UTC)