Talk:Helmholtz International Fellow Award

Notability concern
@User:Onel5969, In your summary, you wrote, "Please do not remove valid tags without improving the article." You added the Template:Notability tag. This tag is not for article improvement. Notability cannot be improved but may be established with multiple independent, and reliable sources per WP:GNG. Please note that a subject of an article doesn't have to meet GNG to be considered notable. GNG is just one of the numerous criteria for notability. That said, the Helmholtz International Fellow Award is a major academic award. It is an award of the Helmholtz Association, the largest scientific organization in Germany. It is a union of 18 scientific, technical, and biological-medical research centers. Per WP:ACADEMIC, awards, honors, and prizes of notable academic societies and notable foundations are notable. This satisfies WP:ACADEMIC Criteria 2. If you disagree, please take the article to AfD. Thank you. Shoerack (talk) 13:20, 10 January 2023 (UTC)


 * The SNGs do not trump GNG. The tag is there until it is marked reviewed by an NPPer.  As it stands right now, the article does not meet GNG, since it does not have enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable secondary sources to show it meets GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:26, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @User:Onel5969, this is factually incorrect. WP:SNG and WP:GNG are independent. WP:SNG for academics and professors operate according to principles that differ from the GNG. Wikipedia policies are not rocket science, please read WP:SNG. Unfortunately, I cannot help you interpreted the policy more than I have done now. Shoerack (talk) 13:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, you are incorrect. While SNGs are different from GNG, they are not independent of it.  Several recent discussions, particularly and most recently that of WP:NFOOTY, go to this.  Unfortunately, you fail to understand that SNGs exist to show that articles which meet them MAY meet notability criteria, "topics which pass an SNG are presumed to merit an article" (emphasis mine).  They do not guarantee they are notable.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * From Notability, emphasis added: "A topic is presumed to merit an article if: (1) It meets either WP:GNG or WP:SNG. "Presumed" is not applicable to SNG only. It's generally applicable to both GNG and SNG. For example, if the subject of an article is the vice chancellor of a major academic institution, it's presumed notable per WP: ACADEMIC, and if a subject has been the subject of multiple independent and reliable sources, they are presumed notable per WP:GNG. Please take this article to WP:AfD so that others can weigh in if your assumption is that the subject is not notable. If you think that significant work needs to be done on the article, that tag does not belong there. Shoerack (talk) 14:10, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I have boldly removed the tag after adding additional information and sources. As pointed out earlier, if you still believe the award is not notable, please take it to AfD. Adding the tag again would be disruptive at this point. Thank you. Shoerack (talk) 21:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)