Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irene Kyza

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. czar 06:37, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Irene Kyza

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NPROF, WP:SIGCOV. Searches bring back her thesis and teaching info, but no significant coverage. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 04:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 04:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 04:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 04:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete, sadly. She appears to be on a promising career track but not yet at the point of meeting our academic notability standards. I don't think the Emmy Noether Fellowship is enough for WP:PROF#C2; it is described as a way of boosting research after family leave rather than as a recognition of outstanding scholarship, and with four given in 2020 it doesn't look selective enough. My delete is weak because she also has some news coverage [1] but I only found one story and it didn't provide enough depth of coverage. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:52, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Still WP:TOOSOON for WP:NPROF C1 for this 2009 PhD, particularly with the kind of career break with which the Emmy Noether fellowship is intended to help. Google Scholar profile here. (I'd suggest more broadly that we should regard the Emmy Noether fellowship as comparable to a prestigious postdoc: it makes later notability more likely, but doesn't support notability much itself.) The local interest coverage doesn't help much. No other signs of notability. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 07:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Insufficient coverage for GNG. The Emmy Noether fellowship is an early-career / postdoc level milestone, all be it of some prestige, and does not confer NPROF. Her citation record shows a h-index of 8 (total citation count 199, most cited paper 47) which is very far off from the required for NPROF-C1.--Eostrix (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 07:56, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems like WP:TOOSOON. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:02, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:SIGCOV is not met Yaxı Hökmdarz (talk) 13:12, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete fails WP:GNG and WP:PROF .Note Emmy Noether Fellowship is not enough to meet WP:PROF#C2.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:31, 7 September 2021 (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.