Talk:John Truss

Notability
I was curious of your take on Truss's notability. There doesn't seem to be much in terms of sigcov although his H-index (Semantic Scholar) seems respectable in the field of pure mathematics during the late 20th-century. TJMSmith (talk) 01:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not really convinced, at least not by the draft as written. The citation counts, while good for pure math, are not really exceptional, and I don't think good enough to make a strong case for WP:PROF. One generally expects higher citation numbers for more senior academics (because they've had longer for the citations to accumulate). The books look like standard texts on standard subjects; there's one non-routine review of the discrete math book at and one routine review (not counting towards notability) at . The analysis book has two routine reviews at  and . The issue is that, while it's not quite true that MR and zbl review every mathematics publication, they review such a large fraction of them that it is not any kind of distinction to be reviewed by them. So the case for WP:AUTHOR is borderline at best. And all we know of his education and career is his current affiliation. It's possible to find his dissertation title and location, but that's still not a lot of information. I'm not saying he's non-notable; he seems to have had a successful and respectable career, and there could well be more to it that I'm missing. But the draft doesn't make the case and my web searches didn't find enough to convince me. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your thorough review. I was slightly surprised that Truss doesn't seem to be a recipient of any academic awards or fellowships which would have pushed this otherwise borderline case past the notability threshold in my mind. TJMSmith (talk) 02:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC)