Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamal Lasri (3rd nomination)

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 delete. As this was the fifth deletion, I have also salted the title (protected it against re-creation). That does not prevent creation of an article if in future he becomes notable: protection can be removed by any administrator if an acceptable draft is accepted at WP:Articles for creation. JohnCD (talk) 14:00, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jamal Lasri

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

This is more or less the same article that went through an AFD almost three years ago. The original author has had a major issue with COI and sockpuppetry, and right now this page is almost identical with the one found on User:Jamal Lasri (Chemist); although the two articles haven't been edited by the same IP or user as far as I can tell. I've done a couple of checks, but I see nothing that changes the outcome of the previous AFD. Just about all sources in the article seems to be either citations from his published papers, or links to biography pages on various University websites. The only reason I'm not CSD'ing this is the three years span since the last AFD. Bjelleklang - talk 07:12, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Morocco-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Despite being full professor now the citation counts are too low for WP:PROF#C1 and I don't see anything else. So even if there weren't the sockpuppetry/COI problems, I don't see a reason to keep. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:51, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I looked at it and I agree, I can't find anything that meets theWP:PROF criteria. RegistryKey^(RegEdit) 06:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He is a brilliant scientist who works in different universities: Morocco, Spain, Portugal and Saudi Arabia. In Portugal, he published several research articles in collaboration with the Ex-Minister of Education and Universities (VIII constitutional government of Portugal) Prof. João J. R. Fraústo da Silva. He also speaks 5 languages, and published in different fiels of research (organic and coordination chemistry and catalysis), he has articles in the top chemistry journals. Moreover, the current article is a notable topic of high interest to the general public with enough available sources. Neverthelesss, some other references/publications are needed though (which is not a case of deleting the article but of improving it). elisabete alegria (talk) 18:12, 8 October 2015 (UTC) — elisabete alegria (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 12:02, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I did a somewhat careful search using WoS and, after removing quite a few high-citation publications from Jacob Lasri (who was at Technion, Northwestern, et al, and who is a different person from the subject), I find a publication list having citations: 38, 35, 31, 29 (h-index 14). The highest citation papers in this list have many authors and seem to come from the lab of Armando Pombeiro. That is, it does not appear that Lasri was the PI or sole investigator, but rather a lab member of some kind. He may be a "brilliant scientist", as our colleague asserts above, but the standard metrics by which a scientist in a high-citation discipline is assessed here at WP do not yet indicate notability. This is probably WP:TOOSOON. The history of the article does not help. I would suggest that proponents and other interested editors revisit this entry once Lasri has a higher scientific impact that can clearly be associated with him as an individual. Agricola44 (talk) 16:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:PROF. Not notable. Article has been deleted four times in the past and hence an admin should consider WP:SALT. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:29, 20 October 2015 (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.