Talk:Paul Christiano (researcher)

Notability
This guy's notability seems extremely shaky. This is mostly a WP:REFBOMB of primary sources. The Fortune piece does actually about Christiano a lot, so that's one. The Vox piece is from their EA vertical, and Piper is talking up her friend here. I just removed one ref that didn't mention Christiano at all.

What are the three most convincing RS sources that Christiano passes WP:NBIO, WP:NSCIENTIST or any other Wikipedia notability criterion? - David Gerard (talk) 09:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Anyone? - David Gerard (talk) 21:19, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * PROD placed due to lack of evidence and lack of any response - David Gerard (talk) 13:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Just responded to your AfD here but as part of the DYK nomination above, User:Cielquiparle and I agreed that the subject satisfies WP:ACADEMIC due to notable research impact. Enervation (talk) 08:58, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Publications section
@Enervation You might consider splitting out all the articles co-authored by Christiano into a standalone "Publications" section, and try to avoid citing those works directly as much as possible. (But you can cite the works that cite and discuss them.) Cielquiparle (talk) 13:20, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Or rather, don't just include a list of publications - WP:NOTRESUME, we don't do that generally - David Gerard (talk) 16:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I meant just the notable ones. Cielquiparle (talk) 17:25, 17 November 2023 (UTC)