Talk:Anirudh Devgan

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this draft duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: cadence.com/content/cadence-www/global/en_US/home/company/executive-team.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  SITH   (talk)   10:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

First, I'd like to add two important awards. He has been awarded a IEEE Fellow and the IIT Dehli Distinguished Alumni Award" Bizblues (talk) 22:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Second, I'd like to add an award he just received: In 2023, he was elected to the National Academy of Engineering.

Adding awards
I'd like to add these to Anirudh's page:

He has been awarded an IEEE Fellow and the IIT Dehli Distinguished Alumni Award. In 2023 he was elected to the National Academy of Engineering. Bizblues (talk) 22:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)


 * This isn't a place to make lists of nonnotable awards, and you should not be editing this article given the COI you have. MrOllie (talk) 21:49, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @MrOllie Being elected an IEEE Fellow is explicitly mentioned as sufficient for notability in Notability_(academics) under Specific criteria notes item 3. Anirudh Devgan was elected IEEE Fellow in 2006. His 2021 Phil Kaufman Award is considered "the Nobel prize of the EDA industry". These distinctions and the election to the NAE show that Devgan made exceptional contributions to his field. There is no reason to question his notability, and the hostility to adding his contributions is unjustified (also borderline offensive). As I don't have any CoI with Devgan, I added his key contributions with references and hope that the banner questioning notability is removed. B030510 (talk) 07:08, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I removed more additions of nonnotable awards and promotional statements. Asking a paid editor to abide by Wikipedia's terms of use is not 'hostile'. MrOllie (talk) 14:38, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @MrOllie, I have received a message from @B030510 at my talk page.
 * I am generally an inclusionist but after Google News search I had felt doubtful about WP:SIGCOV and looking at then this talk page discussion (see t/p history) I had tagged the article for COI and Notability. If @MrOllie or/and any other experinced user feel satisfied with the state of article, from my side, I would  not have any issues in removing the said tags.
 * Best wishes and cheers
 * &#32;Bookku   (talk) 15:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I still have issues with the article. The source given for IEEE Fellowship was to a company press release, which is not a reliable source. I checked and he does not appear in the IEEE Fellows directory. Still needs better sourcing. MrOllie (talk) 15:37, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @MrOllie - thank you for the fast response. Interesting observation about IEEE Fellowship! I'll ask if anyone at IEEE can check the records for errors. However, the Phil Kaufman Award is much more selective than the IEEE Fellowship (you can see the caliber of people who received it) and is well-sourced, so why doesn't that alone satisfy notability? Also, membership in National Academy of Engineering (a society) is more selective than IEEE Fellowship and you removed it from the Awards section even though it is well-sourced. I'll leave lesser disagreements for later discussions :) B030510 (talk) 19:28, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Niche awards don't lead to automatic notability. That's for stuff like MacArthur Fellowships or Nobel prizes - the kind of things where the recipients are getting written up in the newspaper. MrOllie (talk) 19:33, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Let's read the rules, @MrOllie Specifically, Notability (academics):
 * Specific criteria notes
 * 2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.
 * 3. The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a Fellow of a major scholarly society for which that is a highly selective honor (e.g., the IEEE).
 * Devgan was elected to National Academy of Engineering, which is at the same exact level as National Academy of Sciences. Could you explain why you removed that piece of info and why don't you accept that for notability per item 3?
 * As for "written up in a newspaper", you are applying general notability requirements that are not required for academic notability. The Phil Kaufman Award is the top international award in the field of Electronic Design Automation (as explained in the respective article) and not a niche award. It should be sufficient for academic notability per item 2. But even the NAE membership alone should be enough for notability per item 3. Morally, Devgan is a highly accomplished academic with several top awards/honors in his field (including two prestigious awards for his scholarly papers, that you removed), so I don't understand the resistance to applying stated rules for academic notability. Granted, the involvement of a paid editor was awkward, but that does not take away from established accomplishments.
 * @MrOllie, Criteria 2 and 3 do not discuss breadth of the field or niches, but just in case
 * For the purposes of satisfying Criterion 1, the academic discipline of the person in question needs to be sufficiently broadly construed. Major disciplines, such as physics, mathematics, history, political science, or their significant subdisciplines (e.g., particle physics, algebraic geometry, medieval history, fluid mechanics, cancer genetics are valid examples). Overly narrow and highly specialized categories should be avoided. Arguing that someone is an expert in an extremely narrow area of study is, in and of itself, not necessarily sufficient to satisfy Criterion 1, except for the actual leaders in those subjects.
 * For the purposes of satisfying Criterion 1, the academic discipline of the person in question needs to be sufficiently broadly construed. Major disciplines, such as physics, mathematics, history, political science, or their significant subdisciplines (e.g., particle physics, algebraic geometry, medieval history, fluid mechanics, cancer genetics are valid examples). Overly narrow and highly specialized categories should be avoided. Arguing that someone is an expert in an extremely narrow area of study is, in and of itself, not necessarily sufficient to satisfy Criterion 1, except for the actual leaders in those subjects.


 * To this end, Electronic Design Automation is comparable to algebraic geometry. Top conferences are attended by several thousands people every year, there are IEEE Transactions and ACM Transactions (peer-reviewed journals run by broad professional societies) focused on this field, etc. I am curious how you are going to substantiate your claims of "niche" awards/fields. But, again, a top national or international award does not even need to be checked for niche. Moreover, the Kaufman award is the top leadership award in the field (and Devgan is the CEO of a top-two company), so even Criterion 1 has an exception for "niche fields", in case you insist on your assessment. B030510 (talk) 22:04, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bookku - tagging you since the notability concerns were yours. B030510 (talk) 22:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * It's good you are doing effort for betterment of the article. For quality of the articles it's always good that other experienced users examine various encyclopedic aspects.
 * What I suggest/ request is prepare a statement on independence of each of source used - that I/ or any other experienced user shall prefer to be assured about. Then you can request inputs from contributors of similar articles. If any doubt or disagreement persist present those at WP:RSN community feedback.
 * If any disagreement persist thereafter too then one can present disagreement at WP:DRN and there after WP:RFC. These are usual Wikipedia procedures and one need not be afraid about.
 * Happy editing and cheers! &#32;Bookku   (talk) 07:07, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bookku - I definitely share the appreciation for standard rules and procedures, so let's follow them. What kind of statement did you have in mind and where is it mentioned in the rules?
 * As I pointed out, Devgan very directly satisfies each of Criteria 2 and 3 in the rules quoted above (each of them is sufficient). He was elected to the National Academy of Engineering, and the source for that is from the nae.edu Web site (National Academy of Engineering) --- seems obvious and just what is needed. I see no other connection between Devgan and NAE. So, that should do it. But there's also Criterion 3 satisfied by the Phil Kaufman Award, which (as explained in the wiki page) is given by SEMI and IEEE CEDA (professional societies). There are three sources given for Devgan - one from semi.org and two from ieee-ceda.org : I see no other CoI between Devgan and either SEMI or IEEE CEDA. This seems straightforward and can be checked without experience or secret knowledge, so why this resistance to apply stated criteria of notability? Whom else should I ask? Thank you for your consideration.
 * P.S. I asked around about the failed IEEE Fellow check --- most likely, IEEE screwed up, but this might take time to fix. Fortunately, Devgan satisfies criteria in two other ways, and there may be others. B030510 (talk) 08:21, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Now I have initiated discussion at WP:RSN#Anirudh Devgan for confirmation of reliability of sources. Please discuss reliability of sources there, and do not discuss here un til WP:RSN discussion is over. 11:31, 4 September 2023 (UTC) &#32;Bookku   (talk) 11:31, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bookku Now that the discussion has been archived, may I know the conclusion? Is the patient dead or alive? B030510 (talk) 09:02, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 414#Anirudh Devgan
 * &#32;Bookku   (talk) 16:35, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bookku - I believe the matter is now closed because reliable sources indicate that Devgan is indeed an IEEE Fellow. The IEEE Fellow lookup only shows current IEEE members, so an unsuccessful lookup in no way invalidates Devgan's past recognition. As an aside, the procedure you followed seems to have been inconclusive. Perhaps, it's better to read WP:SCHOLAR and apply the rules as stated. I find it shocking that so many editors here failed to do that and fell back on irrelevant generalities. Perhaps, we can all learn from this experience. B030510 (talk) 04:29, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @B030510, Sorry being busy in real life I could not spare enough time to get into policy nuances myself, hence preferred to invite uninvolved opinions.
 * Since usually I am inclusionist and an experienced user removed notability tag from the article and that is okay for me. (So this chapter is over for me un til any new WP:RfC or WP:AFD comes up if at all from any other user.)
 * Though personally the chapter is over for me, couple of other experienced users still seem to have apprehensions over notability. If any other user still does not feel assured of notability they can opt for WP:RfC or WP:AFD or any other WP:DR mechanism if they find necessary.
 * Happy editing and cheers &#32;Bookku   (talk) 14:05, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Happy editing and cheers &#32;Bookku   (talk) 14:05, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

B030510 (talk) 20:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Notability
Please see above discussion and Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 414 While it's assuring that User:Arjunaraoc agreed about notability at Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 414. Same time from comment of User:Altenmann on this t/p I am not sure they are on the same page or not on notability concerns. While I understand effort and sentiment of B030510, since usually clearer consensus is advisable I would prefer to have at least couple of more uninvolved inputs hence I am placing input requests @ concerned project talk pages namely WP:BLPN, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Business, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Science and academia.

&#32;Bookku   (talk) 18:12, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Altenmann does not question notability. What a weird discussion. President and CEO of the NUMBER ONE company in electronic design automation industry? Are you sure you are using a computer or a cellphone? Or are you chiseling Wikipedia on clay tablets? - Altenmann >talk 20:12, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Lots of CEOs of big companies (most, probably) aren't notable independently from their companies. - MrOllie (talk) 20:23, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you have statistics for such a bold claim? What is "big", by the way? I challenge you to find me another multiBillion company without article for its president in wp, and for $10 I will write it. - Altenmann >talk 05:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Altenmann - I agree with your sentiment, although Synopsys and Cadence are more like Visa and Mastercard in their industry. Moreover, Devgan is an elected member of National Academy of Engineering, made specific award-winning technical contributions, and received a "lifetime achievement" award --- each of those is sufficient for notability. It's mindboggling that @MrOllie keeps on throwing abstract, unsubstantiated objections. B030510 (talk) 18:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Notability is not inherited. Being CEO of a notable company doesn't make a person notable also. Significant coverage by independent sources is required, and those sources should be independent of the person, company, or any award agencies. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:29, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Nonense 1: Being a CEO of a HUGE (not simply "notable") means that the nominator is extremely lazy for due diligence. Nonsense 2: "award agencies??? How's that? - Altenmann >talk 00:21, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Anachronist, Devgan's notability is due to criteria outlined in WP:NPROF. These types of awarding societies are themselves doing an assessment of notability independent of the person or their organizations. Using them as sources is fine. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Anachronist - Doing a quick search for "coverage" in WP:PROF makes it clear that significant coverage is not required. Hopefully, you are not going to perpetuate this misconception. I don't know what you mean by "award agencies" (name some examples) and why this came up in our discussion. B030510 (talk) 04:15, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Nowhere did I mention NPROF. My point is that being a CEO of a major company doesn't translate into him being notable. That was all. The agencies that gave him awards are mentioned in this discussion, if you read back. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:12, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, fair enough re: CEO, but it's irrelevant to list non-reasons. Did you mean "award agencies" as pejorative or just as "potentially legitimate entities that issued awards"? B030510 (talk) 06:23, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * It is not the fist time I see the essay WP:NOTINHERITED thoroughly misapplied. Devgan's association with Cadence it not "inherited"; he is not a random software eng there; it is Devgan's notable achievement and as such counts towards his notability.  - Altenmann >talk 00:31, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * He is not notable due to being the CEO. He may be notable for other reasons, but not that. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:12, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Adding information about his career at Cadence
Under this text:

In 2012, Devgan joined Cadence Design Systems serving in a number of senior leadership roles before being named President in 2017. In 2021, Devgan joined the board of directors, and later assumed the role of CEO, taking over from Lip-Bu Tan.

Please add:

Under Devgan's leadership, Cadence has grown its net worth to $56B by February 2023. Cadence expanded into biosimulation with the acquisition of OpenEye Scientific. Cadence continued expanding into CFD simulation with the acquisitions of Future Facilitites and Cascade Technologies. Bizblues (talk) 22:34, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose - these press releases do not demonstrate how "Devgan's leadership" contributed to these facts/events.- Altenmann >talk 17:44, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * . We need reliable source coverage that is independent of the subject or the company. See WP:Golden Rule. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Note about the IEEE Fellows directory
The IEEE Fellows directory is painful to use compared to those of other societies. For one thing it lists only those who continue to pay dues and also opt-in to the directory listing. So not being able to find someone there does not mean they weren't elected a Fellow. A press release at the time from a company is fine to use as a source for that. There is an additional confusion here that Devgan keeps giving the announcement date of 2006 as the year; he was part of the "class" that became Fellows as of Jan 1, 2007. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:01, 18 September 2023 (UTC)