Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eleni Chatzi


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 14:45, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Eleni Chatzi

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:NPROF and WP:GNG Kieem trra (talk) 10:41, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Kieem trra (talk) 10:41, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:23, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per NSCHOLAR-1 based on citation record.-- Eostrix  (&#x1F989; hoot hoot&#x1F989;) 14:04, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. To me the case for WP:PROF is borderline enough to make only a weak keep, but I think the Walter L. Huber Civil Engineering Research Prize is significant enough to also give her a pass of #C2. And as chair for structural mechanics and monitoring at ETHZ, there is also a case for #C5. With all that, she doesn't need WP:GNG-type coverage, but I think it is also present, with a chapter about her in the book Inspiring Conversations with Women Professors and a couple of news pieces about her research  . —David Eppstein (talk) 16:31, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:47, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I dont think that C5 applies here but I agree with the rest of your assessment. In Europe often the professorships are fixed and have a historic name (eg group for organic chemistry, for analytical chemistry etc) but that does not mean its a distinguished chair as in the US. If you look at the institute website you will see that each research group has a "name" but that just indicates what they call themselves, it is not a distinction per se (becoming an ETH prof is of course a distinction of sorts, but having a "name" is not a distinction). --hroest 18:41, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * weak keep C1 is pretty borderline but ok, together with the awards she passes the bar. --hroest 18:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Very weak keep. Here are the Scopus citation metrics for the 111 coauthors of hers with 30+ papers (which is the median number of papers of all 233 of her coauthors -- average was 70):
 * Total citations: avg: 2640, med: 1657, Chatzi: 2706.
 * Total papers: avg: 129, med: 97, C: 238.
 * h-index: avg: 29, med: 21, C: 27.
 * Top citations: 1st: avg: 297, med: 173, C: 264. 2nd: avg: 178, med: 119, C: 264. 3rd: avg: 137, med: 98, C: 109. 4th: avg: 109, med: 77, C: 70. 5th: avg: 94, med: 67, C: 70.
 * Top first-author: avg: 177, med: 102, C: 264.
 * Her C1 profile is indeed borderline, and I'm not fully convinced a mid-career award is prestigious enough for C2. But it's likely she will accrue more citations/recognition in the near future, so a pass for me. JoelleJay (talk) 19:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Weak keep, from substantial start on WP:NPROF notability via citations + a couple of substantial awards, combined with GNG notability (particularly the book). The long list of early career awards and grants in the Awards section should surely be trimmed severely, and good portions of the Work section are unsourced. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 21:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep due to cites and awards, either of which on their own probably wouldn't be enough, but together push over the line for WP:NPROF, plus some other coverage which has been mentioned already. -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.