Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ernest S. B. Boston


 * 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   Delete per consensus. Only requests to keep come from the subject, who is also the author. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 20:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Ernest S. B. Boston

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Completely unsourced; does not pass notability standards for a living person; possible conflict of interest as the main editor's username is. Another editor attempted to PROD this, which was removed by the original editor. older ≠ wiser 21:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC) Saying that something is "from a day job" is a bizarre denigration. Practically EVERYTHING important in the world of science and technology comes from peoples 'day jobs'.Ernest S. B. Boston (talk) 22:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. Patents are from his day job, and his writing seems largely unpublished. My prod was declined with the note that he is published "on a regular basis in the Follett TX newspaper". That does not make him notable. And the US Patent Office is not an arbiter of notability, as many AfD debates have shown. Hairhorn (talk) 22:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No reason to keep. Cassandra 73 (talk) 22:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "Day job" is a polite way of saying he was working for someone else. If he was running his own company, then the patents might be more relevant to notability. Almost anyone who's worked at a high enough level at a research firm will hold a patent or two. Hairhorn (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The logic of your statement in regards to whether someone is working for someone else or themselves has absolutely nothing to do with the merits of an invention, there is no connection, just a different kind of org chart.Ernest S. B. Boston (talk) 00:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Ernest S. B. Boston has been publishing writings on a blogspot account for only 2 years and has reached a worldwide audience in that timeframe that is growing purely by word of mouth with a current annual readership rate of 1668 people from over 67 countries. There is also IP address tracking that indicates several instances where one reader has told another reader about the writings. The merits of notability should also look at the total contributions of the individual. Ernest exhibits activity across a wide range of subject matter that is in itself not a common thing. What makes Ernest's first two patents so remarkable is that he wasn't even working in a research department when he made the discoveries of a new chemical that had never been created - and he accomplished the feat in only a day and a half. Ernest hasn't bothered to include his work of computer science which "interfered" with two thirds of his chemistry career.Ernest S. B. Boston (talk) 00:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC) If you examine the patent work carefully you will notice that Ernest is the sole recipient of the patent - there are not part of a group effort as so many patents are in the world of technology research. Ernest S. B. Boston (talk) 00:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC) I have found other other patents from other chemists who have used the chemical ATHET(antimony tris(2,hydroxyethylthiolate)) that was invented by Ernest S B Boston as a base for further inventions which were patented in the field of metals passivation for hydrocarbon cracking catalysis. The chemical is marketed by Catalyst Resources Incorporated (reference inside patent 5389233) and used worldwide for a considerable length of time and volume in the production of petroleum products.
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this person. Joe Chill (talk) 22:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable as a chemist. I can verify the patents, but no indication of significance. When very weak notability is asserted in several completely different fields, the conclusion is not that it amounts to actual notability, but rather that an attempt is being made to piece together a case for a non-notable individual. If he were notable as a blogger, there would be no need to try to emphasize the other aspects.   DGG ( talk ) 01:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

see: US Patent 5389233 - Metals passivation of cracking catalysts

see: US Patent 5378349 - Passivated catalysts for cracking process Ernest S. B. Boston (talk) 21:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC) Another indication of the importance of the earliest chemical product and process patents of Ernest S B Boston was the act of filing for invention protection in foreign countries, besides the normal protection on U.S. soil. The number of countries filed in was revealed to the inventor only "at least 5" in regards to the nominal extra payment paid for the foreign filings to the inventor by his employer. Ernest S. B. Boston (talk) 21:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC) Another use of the chemical ATHET is found in a preparation under this patent: Synthesis and thermal stability of antimony tris (thioethyl stearate) for PVC (poly vinyl chloride), where it is used as the feedstock.

https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs11771-000-0024-x

There is considerable activity with the chemical ATHET in Chinese reference by Googling the full chemical name, so it should not be considered a trivial chemical invention, being used in multiple chemical applications by several inventors, all dependent upon the original work of Ernest S B Boston. Ernest S. B. Boston (talk) 23:33, 5 October 2009 (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.