User:DGG/About academic bios

Advice comment
Let me give you some advice, based on standard practice on the enWP under the policy WP:NOTCV. (This is not necessarily my own preferences, but as one of the experienced science biography reviewers here, I give it as a summary of what I believe to be the standard.)

Full advice on content
An encyclopedia article is not a CV. Make sure the article contains, first, the basic biographical information such as birthyear and birthdplace, parent's namesand occupations, especially if relevant, but not more remote relatives. Then the full sequence of degrees and professional positions in chronological order, with dates. A statement of research interest can come here, if there's a good source for it. If the research has been noticed by major news sources, give the links. Professional activities can follow: add major national-level outside positions, such as president of the major national organizations, and any positions of editor-in-chief ; membership or minor offices in most societies, and service on editorial boards or as reviewer, do not count for much & are better omitted. University service of major significance can be listed also: Heads of departments or research units, deanships-- but not membership on committees. If there are any notable former gradate students or postdoc, with Wikipedia articles, list them. Important community service is relevant: heads of major government or international committees, but not memberships of public lectures or appearances on programs. Finally, a complete list of books published, with year, date, publisher, ISBN (referenced to WorldCat), and links to published reviews of the books; and (in the sciences) the 5 or so most cited peer-reviewed articles, given in full with coauthors, full name of journals, and links, with the number of citations to each of them from Google Scholar of Scopus or ISI; any major national level awards--(not junior awards or awards from their own university or research grants. ). Include honorary degrees, and visiting professorships, but not individual lectures unless of at least national prestige.

It's important to avoid anything that look like promotionalism or autobiography ,or anything that looks like it was written by the university's PR office, just as it is that it not look like an autobiography. Very sparse articles attract skepticism. as do those using vague claims and superlatives, or those that list all possible internal and external committes.

Brief advice
An encyclopedia article is not a CV. Make sure the article contains, first, the basic biographical information such as birthyear and birthdplace, then the full sequence of degrees and professional positions in chronological order, with dates. Next, a complete list of books published, with year, date, publisher, ISBN (referenced to WorldCat), and links to published reviews of the books; and (in the sciences)  the 5 or so most cited peer-reviewed articles, given in full with coauthors, full name of journals, and links, with the number of citations to each of them from Google Scholar of Scopus or ISI; any national level awards--(not junior awards or awards from their own university) Add major national-level outside positions, such as president of the major national organizations, and any positions of editor-in-chief ; Membership or minor offices in most societies, and service on editorial boards, do not count for much & are better omitted. Very sparse articles attract skepticism. as do those using vague claims and superlatives, or those that list all possible internal and external committes.

Notability/Verifiability advice
The notability for academics has a special guideline: the person can meet the GNG, but could also meet WP:PROF, and usually that's the one that works. . There are many parts to WP:PROF, but the usual one is being influential in one's field as shown by citation to their papers. The basic bio part of an article on an academic ought if possible to contain  information such as birthyear and birthdplace, then the full sequence of degrees and professional positions in chronological order, with dates. A official university website is sufficient to provide Verifiability for this  information, although it is not fully independent: they are considered sufficiently reliable. . This is different from notability. The notability of a professor or other scientist depends on their work. A list of publications with citation information from Google scholar is independent enough, and if the counts are high enough it will prove notability. . Having received a notable prize can be shown by the university source alone, but it is much better to find an independent source as well, and that is usually possible.