Talk:Thomas Willwacher

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... I believe the proof mentioned in the article may be a WP:CCS within his academic field. It certainly produces a lot of Google results. We possibly need an opinion from WikiProject Mathematics. -- Murph 9000 (talk) 15:21, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Notability
Tagged for notability, as while I believe the article does pass WP:CCS, and probably does have notability, it has yet to establish the notability through WP:RS. A mathematician with a widely published, peer reviewed, and talked about proof almost certainly does have notability. See also WP:PROF. Murph 9000 (talk) 17:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Together ?
together with Thomas Willwacher we also proved http://cordis.europa.eu/result/rcn/49150_en.html Xx236 (talk) 11:45, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Not particularly unusual in scientific academia for it to be joint effort and credit (sometimes with many more uncredited lower level contributors). Here's what ETH have listed for him (the above was an ETH project for the European Commission): http://e-citations.ethbib.ethz.ch/list.php?browse=author&author=Willwacher%2C+Thomas&lang=en  The phrasing in the article should possibly be changed from "known for the proof" to "known for his work on the proof", as I think the latter has less chance for interpretation as him working alone.  Optionally add " in conjunction with the EU DYNQUANTGR project."
 * Many more credits here: http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/au:+willwacher/0/1/0/all/0/1?per_page=100
 * Murph 9000 (talk) 12:15, 1 February 2016 (UTC)