Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric R. Bittner

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 keep. (non-admin closure) HurricaneFan 25 00:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eric R. Bittner

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

No claim of notability. No independent third party references. One specialist award and two mass-awards received. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please note: In view of this "articles for deletion" entry, I have updated the article on that he is now distinguished professor, and completed the lists of his awards. He has also authored a scientific book on his subject of research. --Chris Howard (talk) 00:34, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Howard asked me to re evaluate in light of the new distinguished professor information.: No matter what claims or information are presented, without independent third party sources notability is always going to be doubtful. I note in particular that much information is referenced to http://k2.chem.uh.edu/ which appears to the subjects own webserver, which is not a WP:RS. Some of the information is also on the webpages of his department, which is only marginally better. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:15, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No time to look into this myself right now, but if the claim of a named professorship that is made in the article can be substantiated, that would meet WP:PROF. In the Web of Science I get 82 hits with 1352 citations and an h-index of 20. Top citation counts 115, 109, 81. Although not outstanding, this is pretty decent, especially for someone at his career stage. The awards all seem to be rather trivial (an NSF Career Award is just a type of grant, not really an award). --Crusio (talk) 09:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The named professorship can be verified through primary sources. [1]. -- Whpq (talk) 15:49, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, but WP:PROF requires it be verified through reliable sources, and primary sources aren't in this case. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:51, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A primary source in this case meets verifiability. See WP:RS#Reliability in specific contexts. There is no reason to believe that the University's own web site is factually incorrect about the professorship, and requires no interpretation on the part of an editor to derive the information as it is simply a plain fact. As such, the use of a primary source in this case is acceptable. -- Whpq (talk) 18:59, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep is my view as author of the article. By now, leaving aside his personal page at the UH, I have added three further references about the Moores professorship ([2],[3],[4]) – all from the University of Houston, but as indicated above there is no reason to assume them to be factually incorrect. --Chris Howard (talk) 20:49, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are entries at google books that refer to the work of the subject: https://www.google.com/search?q=Eric+R.+Bittner&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=Eric+R.+Bittner&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=bks&source=og&sa=N&tab=wp&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=ba38c07d8839507e&biw=1680&bih=812 providing reliable sources--MLKLewis (talk) 21:00, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Basically any academic will have some GBooks hits. It's the nature of those hits that determines whether they contribute anything to notability. --Crusio (talk) 21:23, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets the criteria of WP:ACADEMIC in two ways. Above all, he holds a named/endowed professorship at a major research university (criterion #5). This is confirmed by the university itself[5]; such a listing by the university is in fact the primary way to confirm that someone holds an endowed professorship. In addition, his citations at Google Scholar suggest that he is important in his field. --MelanieN (talk) 21:43, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:PROF#C5. The citation record is probably also good enough for #C1, but that's not as much of a slam dunk. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:09, 28 November 2011 (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.