Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Bernard Lewinsky

h-index
I calculated the h-index using the following criteria in a search on ISI Web of Knowledge. The italicized ones are ones that should probably be checked, as they might affect results if they are the same person.

Author=(Lewinsky B) Refined by: [excluding] Subject Areas=(GENERAL & INTERNAL MEDICINE OR GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY OR DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE OR GENETICS & HEREDITY OR IMMUNOLOGY OR DERMATOLOGY OR ORTHOPEDICS OR OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY OR PSYCHOLOGY OR PATHOLOGY OR PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY OR PEDIATRICS OR GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY OR CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM & CARDIOLOGY OR LIFE SCIENCES & BIOMEDICINE - OTHER TOPICS OR PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH OR MATERIALS SCIENCE OR REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY OR DEMOGRAPHY OR MATHEMATICS OR RESPIRATORY SYSTEM OR NEUROSCIENCES & NEUROLOGY OR BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES OR UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY OR ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY OR CELL BIOLOGY OR ZOOLOGY OR BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY OR ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM ) Timespan=All Years.

I found twenty papers in ISI's Web of Knowledge. They have the following citation counts: {1, 0, 0, 10 [BL is 3rd author out of 8], 1, 0, 0, 0, 8 [2nd author out of 3], 0, 0, 4 [8th author out of 9], 17 [30th author out of 38], 1 [last author, but I don't think it's the person we want], 0, 0, 0, 4 [last author out of 2], 0}. Five "papers" (the 17 citation one is a conference report I think) with four or more citations, three with five or more citations gives an h-index of 4. NW ( Talk ) 22:29, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, whoa, your citation numbers seem really low. Which of those are the two papers cited 400 times and which are the five papers cited more than 100 times? Silver  seren C 22:31, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * They didn't show up in ISI Web of Knowledge. Can I have PMID numbers please? NW ( Talk ) 22:32, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I only have the DOI.
 * DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960601)77:11<2267::AID-CNCR13>3.0.CO;2-V
 * Oh, this one is PMID.
 * Those are the two that have 400 cites. Silver  seren C 22:34, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Found them. I think there might be multiple authors with the same first initial and last name, so let me do some digging and get back to you. NW ( Talk ) 22:36, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As long as Google Scholar ends up giving us the same views, look here. I'm fairly certain that one Bernard S Lewinsky involved in cancer research is the only one out there. Silver  seren C 22:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Apparently all the highly-cited ones had fallen under dermatology, which I figured was far enough away from his subject area to exclude. Apparently not. And slightly annoyingly, he goes by Lewinsky BS and Lewinsky B in citations. NW ( Talk ) 22:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ...*blinks* I guess...they're about breast cancer that forms on the skin of the breast? I mean, they are using the term carcinoma, so that does make sense. Still...it's a bit weird to see a dermatology topic printed in Cancer. But skin cancer does fall under there, it's just...generally dealt with in the journals specifically for that. Silver  seren C 22:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, names get confusing. This is why h-indexes are hard. When I looked him up on ISI under Bernard Lewinsky, he didn't even come up at all. Silver  seren C 22:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if h-index should include conference papers for medicine. Medicine is not like computer science, where conference papers are a huge deal. Here are the citation counts, with the traditional academic articles bolded. I've included what ranking in the author list Lewinsky was with something like [3/7], in the cases where it matters.
 * 0, 0, 0, 308 [5/8], 88 [4/8], 0, 0 0, 25 [2/4], 0 [1/2], 6 [5/7], 317 [5/7], 392 [7/9], 0, 0, 119 [2/7], 20 [5/12], 44 [8/9], 7 [2/3], 102 [7/8], 29 [2/5], 44 [6/6], 142 [8/9], 0, 0, 122 [8/10], 62 [8/10], 0, 0, 0, 0 [don't think this is him], 9 [3/5], 17 [31/39], 0 [don't think this is him], 1 [6/6], 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 36 [2/4, don't think this is him], 4 [3/6, don't believe it is him], 11 [6/6], 4 [2/2], 10 [1/2], 0, 27 [2/5], 16 [3/5], 22 [2/3], 20 [1/7, not sure if it is him or not], 3 [1/2], 121 [1/4. This is weird. Unless he studied in England at some point, I have no idea why this would be him. It is his full name though.]
 * Pain in the ass to calculate this by hand. h-index is like 13-15 if you don't include conference papers, 17 if you do. Note though his ranking on each of the papers he has written. He is not one of the major authors on the vast majority of the things he has published. NW ( Talk ) 23:11, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for all the work you had to do, but thanks! His index is where I thought it would be and shows his notability. Any issues with there being multiple authors in relation to his notability is held up by the fact that there are sources in the article that are completely about his cancer research. So, IMO, he passes under WP:ACADEMIC and the WP:GNG. Silver  seren C 23:35, 5 July 2011 (UTC)