Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter J. Wagner


 * 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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Peter J. Wagner
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

not a notable scientist. Does not meet WP:PROF Northfox (talk) 07:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * How are you picking these? Could you please expand on how he fails WP:PROF? Although his citations are hard to sort out from a chemist with the same initials, he's got quite a few of them. Also, he won an award that has its own Wikipedia article. News organizations quote him. And he is curator. Abductive (talk) 15:18, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, he is just an average successful scientist. He won one award for young scientists a while ago. That's all. He is not heavily quoted. If you delete the entries for the chemist with the name of Peter J. Wagner, the list gets even shorter. Quotes from news organizations are not in his article. There is nothing written about him. It is not clear what outstanding contribution he made that allows for a wikiarticle that is meant for the general public. Northfox (talk) 03:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The award was in 2004, and it's not some sort of made up award within one school or something. It is the young researcher award from the Paleontological Society, the 101 year old international society for his field. They only have two other awards, the one for amateurs and the medal for someone whose "eminence is based on advancement of knowledge in paleontology."
 * His research did make the lay news, where he is called the "lead scientist" on an important result. The question is, what else could he do to be notable? Abductive (talk) 05:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Has won a notable award. Appears to be heavily cited   as well. Edward321 (talk) 15:54, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:PROF, though the key papers and citations should be added. The title of "Curator" is approximately equivalent to the title of Full Professor, and this is one of the most important museums in the world, of similar significance as the highest ranking research university. The influence on the field is through the citations, per established precedent in this rule. DGG (talk) 04:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —David Eppstein (talk) 01:25, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep WoS for the paleontologist gives h = 16; top three cites are 146, 68, 63. Looks O.K. to me. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:57, 20 June 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.