Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artem Chernikov

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.

Artem Chernikov

Artem Chernikov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG and, more to the point, WP:ACADEMIC. Associate professors are not inherently notable, and a 30 year old fresh doctor with barely 600 citations in his particular field does not cut it per criterion 1, especially when being a co-author in all but 40 of those citations. PK650 (talk) 21:44, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. PK650 (talk) 21:44, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:46, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:47, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - No independent coverage, does not pass
  WP:ACADEMIC as per nomination. Achaea (talk) 07:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep - Sacks Prize, CAREER Award, Sloan Award. This mathematician is a star. The awards alone qualify him under item 2. of
  WP:PROF. As for "coauthor issue" it is neither discussed in WP:PROF nor relevant. Having coauthors is normal in maths, and it is he personally who got the individual prizes rather them being a joint award. Mhym (talk) 09:04, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak keep. The prizes are strictly early career stuff, and do not contribute towards notability. 600 citations in a low citation field, however, looks like enough for
  WP:NPROF C1. The level of coauthorship doesn't look especially high, and I'll comment that Pierre Simon, who he's collaborated with the most, is another young person (so it doesn't look like he is being pulled along by his advisor or similar). The article appears to have been originated by the subject's colleague, and unsourced personal details should be removed. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:18, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Which unsourced personal details are you thinking of? I read the article carefully and found none - the article seems well referenced. Mhym (talk) 13:06, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My complaints are limited to the personal details in the lede -- date and place of birth. It'd be good style to repeat and expand with citation in the first sentence of education and career, or to pare them down if a source can't be found. I notice that he has DOB on an old CV, but I'm guessing place of birth is hard to back up. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 13:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I googled and found an old Flickr page [1] which has the same name, place of birth and his picture [2]. The Flickr also points to a defunct LiveJournal blog [3] which is in turn lists his email [email protected] and WordPress blog [4]. Both of those appear on Chernikov's math articles [5]. I am not sure if this suffices as RS but looks good enough for me as an outsider. Mhym (talk) 15:00, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep meets
  WP:ACADEMIC per Russ Woodroofe's comment. TJMSmith (talk) 16:26, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete per
  WP:TOOSOON. The awards and status are strictly early career stuff. Bearian (talk) 15:50, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak delete. I don't think the early-career awards are enough for
  WP:PROF (sorry, Igor). But he probably will pass in a few years, on his current trajectory, so it's no great harm if this is kept. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:50, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply
  ]

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.