Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New investigator


 * 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 of the debate was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 04:19, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

New investigator
Reads almost like a dictdef, seems to be exclusively used by NIH in a single set of resources. I'm not sure if this belongs on Wikipedia. Cyde Weys 20:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC) 'This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks! Deathphoenix' 15:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * delete └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 23:12, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I feel the whip! :-) No. The definition of new investigator is quite extended across other funding agencies, not just the NIH. But, yes the entry is too short. I need a bit of time to collect some more material (see latest changes). I would like to deal with the problems of investigators starting their careers as independent researchers in a very competitive environment with limited funding. The NIH graph is quite worrying. I wonder if there are other studies for other grants that show similar trends.--Miguel Andrade 00:44, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Conditional keep an interesting article with the clear possibility for growth. Perhaps a title clarifying that it is for research, rather than PIs or something, would be nice. Makemi 04:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, but I am inclined to think it should be merged into an article on the general question of research grants and applications for them. However I can find no such article. In Australia, the term "Early career researcher" is used by the Australian Research Council, but there is no mention of it in that article. --Bduke 22:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Ardenn 07:47, 3 February 2006 (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.