Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masoud Salavati-Niasari: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Xxanthippe (talk | contribs) + |
changing to delete after looking over this again |
||
Line 17:
*:I propose to proceed with deletion at this time. One retraction is quite weak to imply notability / notoriety of the subject, and references to their [[PubPeer]] record are contestable through [[WP:NOR]].
*:If any significant number of retractions arrives in the future, then we will have a firm reason to restore the page. [[User:Neodiprion demoides|Neodiprion demoides]] ([[User talk:Neodiprion demoides|talk]]) 09:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
*'''
:What's a bigger red flag for me is that they are last/corresponding author on 84% of papers, but first author only on 16% of papers checking Web of Science (apparently never a regular co-author/contributor). Maybe it's an irregular power structure thing at their university, but claiming corresponding editor on that many papers seems to suggest they are getting credit for work they didn't directly do beyond a typical corresponding author situation. At least in this case, I would say the citation metrics part of [[WP:NACADEMIC]] is not reliable standalone for notability, so I'd be inclined to say delete considering everything else I've seen here. [[User:KoA|KoA]] ([[User talk:KoA|talk]]) 18:09, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
::In the last few years there has been a vast increase in citation gaming, see [[Research paper mill]], which tends to bamboozle inexperienced editors. If in doubt Delete. [[User:Xxanthippe|Xxanthippe]] ([[User talk:Xxanthippe|talk]]) 22:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC).
|