Talk:Tim Lewens

Notability
Web of Science lists 28 papers, cited a total of 58 times, h-index=4, highest cited paper = 31. I'll continue looking. --Crusio (talk) 11:06, 21 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I have found some extra references (book review, for example) and have added those to the article. Obviously a bright and promising young academic. However, as far as I can see, he does not yet meet any of the criteria of WP:PROF (and even less WP:GNG, which few academics meet directly). Better references establishing notability are needed. --Crusio (talk) 12:36, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I am sure authorities of significance will offer judgement on the notability of this subject. In the interim, awaiting such authority's input, I suggest this article's subject has considerable merit, given his extensive publication and increasing profile in his field.  I should also point out that a person's repute and standing should not be judged on a web trawl for references as other factors such as awards, etc. should be taken into account.  Besides, that he's at Cambridge says it all.LarkinToad2010 (talk) 17:27, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Larkintoad2010, if I wasn't trying to help you here, I would already have brought it to AfD. And as it stands, it would not survive that. WP does not judge a person's "repute and standing". WP judges "notability" in the Wikipedia sense. Lewens being an academic, WP:PROF applies and currently he does not seem to meet any of the criteria outlined there. Being at Cambridge is perhaps suggestive, but certainly is not enough to satisfy that guideline. I don't know what you mean with "authorities of significance" that may or may not come along to judge this article, but that is not how WP works. Anybody can edit and anybody can give an opinion. That includes pimple-faced 14-year old adolescents, I'm afraid, who think that the latest Japanese anime is more notable than Albert Einstein. Because people can hide behind made-up usernames, there's no way of knowing who is what, unless someone (like myself) is editing under their real name. I don't say I like this situation (I actually think people should only be allowed to contribute if they use their real names - that would also rid us from a lot of vandalism and uncivil behavior here). But that's the way it is and it doesn't look like it ever will be different. To come back to the case in point, I actually have real-life experience in evaluating academics. And things being as they are, for a contemporary person almost everything like accomplishments and awards can be found online. I have found nothing like that (a local teaching award will not do for WP:PROF). As you seem to be most familiar with this subject, you're best placed to bring up some evidence that this meets one of the criteria of WP:PROF (just one is enough), so if you know of something, please add it to the article. --Crusio (talk) 22:33, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, let's ask Orville the Duck.LarkinToad2010 (talk) 13:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a good one, sjeez, what a stupid article :-) --Crusio (talk) 14:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)