User talk:Phil Bridger/January 2023 – March 2023

Artikel on Nico Nagelkerke does not satisfy standard Wikipedia criteria for academic notability[edit]

Hi, perhaps you can rapidly edit the Wikipedia article on Nico N. so as to satisfy one or two of Wikipedia's standard criteria for biographies of academics! Are you aware of them?

It's just a question of looking at the checklist WP:ACADEMIC and adding references to reliable sources which document his notability.

It's not a question of whether or not he is a notable Dutch statistician. I have no personal opinion on that. It's a question of whether or not this claim is properly documented.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)

Richard Gill (talk) 10:16, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is precisely a question of whether or not he is a notable Dutch statistician. Deletion decisions are made according to a subject's notability, not the current state of the article. Of course I'm aware of Wikipedia's standard criteria for biographies of academics, as I said which of the criteria the subject seems to pass in my edit summary when contesting deletion. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then the article is simply incomplete since the notability is not documented by references to reliable sources. Richard Gill (talk) 11:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you write “Google Scholar find plenty of works with 3-digit citation numbers, so may pass WP:PROF#C1”. So how about adding a sentence to the article about how highly cited his works are? Richard Gill (talk) 11:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Iodosilane[edit]

I have added a {{missing info}} template to the article about Iodosilane It needs to be expanded. Mast303 (talk) 04:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Kline[edit]

I'm not sure if this person is notable. You deprodded it, but didn't add any inline citations Please fix the tagged issues. Bearian (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodding the article in 2009, with explanation on the talk page, doesn't turn me into its owner. Please feel free to add any available sources. This is very low on my list of priorities. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a few citations to the article. I must say that Wikipedia works best when people seeing easily-fixable problems simply fix them rather than look for someone to order to do so. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Irony[edit]

Hello, a lot of people do not understand irony... Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mirka Vasiljević (I think its funny) Christian75 (talk) 09:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to make my post so over-the-top that people couldn't interpret it as anything but irony. But you are probably right - some people might take it seriously. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion process[edit]

If you wish to contest the speedy deletion then you need to provide a reason. Do not simply remove the nomination.

As for the nomination for deletion, it is a seven day process for discussion. You are not to remove this nomination. Please express your opinions in the appropriate forum and manner per policy. Sagsbasel (talk) 08:10, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]