- 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. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:12, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Maya Nasr (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Postdoctoral scientist at Harvard with an h-factor of 6 and 420 total citations. While she has made a good start to her career, she is some distance from passing WP:NPROF. Some graduate-level awards, and some minor coverage; not close to WP:SIGCOV for WP:GNG. I suspect that in 10 years or so she will pass the bar for notability, maybe even a few years earlier, but now is way WP:TOOSOON. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Astronomy, and Physics. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lebanon and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Agree with nom. A highly successful subject who does not pass notability here. Lots of trivial mentions, primary sources, etc. used as sources which do not contribute to notability, and the article is largely a promotional showcase with a non-neutral point of view. There is a very real possibility that she will become quite notable in the future (but we are not a crystal ball). Just as a side note, the article was created by a single purpose account in 2022. GuardianH 21:20, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Delete (sigh). This is one of the most well-written, helpful articles to not pass WP:N I've ever seen, I suggest that one principal editor retain a copy in user space or offline to safe the trouble of future recreation (Draftify is probably not an option since we're between 3-8 years from passing WP:PROF if I can use prior experience as a guide). But it's definitely not a WP:PROF pass at present -- agree with all of Ldm1954 and GuardianH assessments on overall notability. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 22:20, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Delete, agree with Mscuthbert about this being the best written but non-notable article I've seen. I do hope an article will be warranted in due time. As above so below 23:06, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: I believe this article might squeak by WP:BASIC with two UPI Space Daily articles about the subject [1], [2] (need Proquest access to view) and a few paragraphs in an article written by a NYTimes reporter [3]. I have added these to the article. There are other references but I can't find editorial oversight so not sure if they count as reliable. I wouldn't characterize the article as written by an SPA account but rather a student who worked on several articles, although contributed most to this one. If the UPI Space Daily references count towards notability I'd !vote weak keep. Nnev66 (talk) 18:30, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
- Delete – Per nom and above. Svartner (talk) 00:21, 27 July 2025 (UTC)
- Can you comment on the references added to the article? The statement "per nom and above" does not address them as they were added later. Nnev66 (talk) 02:32, 27 July 2025 (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.