Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ignacio Sáez


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. If an editor wants this article userfied or draftified, contact the closer (me) or make a request at WP:REFUND.. Liz Read! Talk! 20:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Ignacio Sáez

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Doesn't yet meet WP:NPROF; the prize listed is a routine announcement of a grant award by the funder; newspaper articles are likely to be PR-driven churnalism for some of the work. Scopus H-index of 13 in the highly-cited field of Neuroscience implies that there isn't a large body of highly-cited work from Sáez. Klbrain (talk) 19:45, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Spain,  and New York. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think the newspaper articles are legitimate journalism and contribute to establishing notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination, the newspaper articles are either interviews or sensationalistic press. The peer community has clearly received the studies as less impactful, given the relatively low citations of these works. Does not fulfill WP:NPROF. Broc (talk) 08:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete or userfy per the PROF test. The consensus has been that, absent extraordinary number and coverage of reviews, an associate professor is not yet notable. Bearian (talk) 14:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * No. The consensus is that associate professors are not automatically notable. Sometimes they are, more often they are not. They do not have any higher bar than other academics; we do not need extraordinary evidence that we would not demand of someone with a different rank. We cannot use their rank to determine whether they are notable or not; we must look at other criteria. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. With a low publication record and no notable awards there is no significant evidence that his peers consider him notable yet. He may well be in a few years, but it is too soon. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:39, 14 April 2024 (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.