Talk:Basem Al-Shayeb
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Does this article need to exist?
editI am personally of the opinion that this article should be deleted; it is a clear example of trying to abuse Wikipedia as a tool for self-promotion, and the accomplishments of this individual are, while interesting on their own merits, frankly not that noteworthy. Do we really need articles for every person who gets their graduate dissertation work published in a prestigious scientific journal(s) and founds a biotech startup? Xardwen (talk) 01:11, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Elaborating on my previous post: I believe this article violates Wikipedia's rules re: notability and self-promotion. I base this on the following:
1. The first line of the article states that the company which this individual co-founded was funded for $26 million; why is this information noteworthy? I can see no reason to include it other than to make the company sound impressive.
2. Why is it necessary to note this person's status as an NSF Fellow here? How is this relevant? This is not LinkedIn, this is Wikipedia.
3. The note about the CRISPR enzymes this person helped discover (note that the original version of the article had them claiming sole credit for the discovery, when they were, in fact, co-first author on the publication) being licensed by Mammoth Biosciences reads like an attempt to inflate the significance of the discovery.
4. The Forbes 30 Under 30 section very much comes across as an attempt at self-promotion. We don't have articles for every person who has ever been listed; why should we have one for this person?
Overall, I feel that this article is very clearly intended as a vehicle for inflating this person's accomplishments beyond their actual significance. Again- said accomplishments are interesting on their own merits, but they are nowhere near ground-breaking enough to merit a Wikipedia page, at least in my opinion.Xardwen (talk) 08:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)