Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martino Lupini


 * 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 Speedy delete. Deleted by administrator Liz as G5: Created by a banned or blocked user (Justi Rino) in violation of ban or block. Nsk92 (talk) 09:17, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Martino Lupini

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be a bit too early for passing WP:PROF. Four years past PhD, h-index of 11, only student level awards. I am not seeing anything else in the article to indicate passing WP:PROF. Probably soon but not yet. PROD declined by the article's creator, therefore I am listing it for an AfD. Nsk92 (talk) 01:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Nsk92 (talk) 01:48, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete, WP:TOOSOON. It's always problematic evaluating researchers in pure mathematics because our most commonly used metric, citations, works so badly in this field, but with only an entry-level faculty position and best-dissertation awards to go on we have no evidence of academic notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:49, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. The deletion proposal is based on personal and unqualified opinion about dr Lupini's academic achievements and arbitrary interpretation of the WP:PROF criteria. As to the dr. Lupini's academic achievements we can read from Rising star in mathematics world featured in inaugural lecture series: "Dr. Martino Lupini from CalTech University who is producing “exciting and cutting edge mathematics” will speak at the inaugural H.N. Gupta Memorial Lecture March 2 at the U of R"; " Lupini is considered a rising star in the mathematics world.". As to the WP:PROF, its Criterion 2 is arbitrarily interpreted since it's not visible from this criterion how profound research results in the mathematics foundations demonstrated in someone's dissertation could be put on the same academic level as the IMO or the Putnam competition results of the secondary school and undergraduate students. In addition, at many universities worldwide the graduate studies are those leading to the MSc degree, the PhD studies are not considered as the graduate ones, rather above of the graduate ones. Therefore the Criterion 2 of the WP:PROF is unclear and imprecise and nowhere regarding the PhD dissertation disqualified as not notable. Dr. Lupini's academic achievements are far above those listed by Nsk92 and Epstein which can be seen here: Research papers and preprints in Combinatorics, Dynamycal Systems, Operator Algebras, Functional Analysis and Model Theory. There are two books published by the world renown Springer Verlag. Then there is a long list of Invited Talks. The Google h index cannot be taken seriously as a measure of the serious academic credentials and achievements since h-high in such fields like the fixed point or the inequalities cannot be ever superimposed to h-low index of a serious researcher in the mathematics foundations. At the end, the ASL is not an institution supporting talented secondary school or undergraduate students - rather "an international organization supporting research and critical studies in logic. Its primary function is to provide an effective forum for the presentation, publication, and critical discussion of scholarly work in this area of inquiry.". Therefore the  Sacks Prize is about "stunning results", "results that stand out",  "a deep and sustained study", etc. - i.e. not a student level award as Nsk92 stated above.--Justi Rino (talk) 17:53, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Invidious comparisons, special pleading, walls of text, and hints that the article creator might be the return of a blocked sockpuppet (previously active on the article for Lupini's academic grandfather, which would be cause for G5 speedy deletion) aside, the two books could become an indication of notability through WP:AUTHOR rather than WP:PROF, but only if they had multiple published reviews each. "Introduction to Sofic and Hyperlinear Groups" appears to have two, the bare minimum ( in Math. Reviews and in Bull Symb. Logic) but although Nonstandard methods in Ramsey theory has one pending in Math. Reviews it doesn't seem to have any published yet. Again, WP:TOOSOON, although maybe the wait will be shorter for notability in this direction. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:27, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. Justi Rino's sockpuppetry is now confirmed. If we are going to consider G5 speedy deletion for Martino Lupini, perhaps we should also consider it for Justin T. Moore and Ilijas Farah, both created by a previous incarnation of the same puppetmaster and primarily edited by socks? —David Eppstein (talk) 17:51, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Moore appears notable per WP:PROF and Farah perhaps by WP:PROF, but I'd support deleting both under the general principle of banned meaning banned. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with XOR&#39;easter. --JBL (talk) 18:48, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you, XOR&#39;easter. I tagged the page as CSD G5 and I see that it has already been deleted. Nsk92 (talk) 19:02, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Setting aside citations as generally unilluminating for pure mathematics, all we have is a couple awards that might merit a mention but aren't enough to confer wiki-notability, and a pair of (co-authored) books that haven't yet earned the recognition necessary to meet WP:AUTHOR. (A PhD thesis can contain great work, but if it's the kind of accomplishment that would confer wiki-notability, then it would receive recognition above and beyond awards explicitly devoted to student work.) Unspecific praise in a press release counts for nothing. I'd suggest draftifying, but the possibility of sockpuppetry rules that out (we shouldn't preserve content that is eligible for speedy deletion). Nor is there any indication that his work has poked out into publications like Quanta which generally do a decent job at writing about mathematics in a popular or semi-popular way. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 19:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Changing my !vote to "speedy delete" per the identification of the article creator as a sockpuppet of a blocked user. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 16:38, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per everyone above. --JBL (talk) 12:16, 20 August 2019 (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.