User talk:DerekE9831/Trevor David Rhone

Peer Review

The first think I saw when I looked was the format with section heads and that is good. I felt like you had a good flow and built a good time line about his life. The one thing I would like to see more off is the Awards sections, I know this is properly hard but I feel like it is very short and can use expanding. After that I think your draft is really well done and in my opinion almost done. Devin Stangle (talk) 23:15, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi everyone,

I'm Jennifer and I completed my peer review. Overall, your team did a phenomenal job. I look forward to seeing the completed version. JenniGump (talk) 04:58, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Peer Review

Greetings,

I have completed my peer review of your article. Great job on what you have so far, looking forward to the finished product. GrgNd (talk) 04:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Peer Review

Hi,

I've finished my Peer review for this article. It looks great, and I can't wait to see the end result.

You can read the Peer Review Here: User:DerekE9831/Trevor David Rhone/MachInX19 Peer Review

MachInX19 (talk) 05:08, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Inappropriate article

My apologies to @MachInX19, @DerekE9831, @GrgNd, @JenniGump but you do not appear to have carefully read the criteria for academics to be notable, WP:NPROF; the article is well-constructed but he does not qualify as notable. It is very rare for assistant professors to pass the bar. He has certainly made a good start to his career, however, with an h-factor of 11 and 24 publications in an area where typical notable academics have h-factors of more than 50 and hundreds of publication he has a long way to go, it is WP:TOOSOON. I am going to draftify this so you can analyze, I feel this is gentler than the alternative of nominating for deletion. Ldm1954 (talk) 03:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Ldm1954, I've been working with @DerekE9831 on Trevor David Rhone's draft. I feel together, the following considerations contribute towards satisfying criteria 1:

• Rhone's work in 2D magnetic materials earned him recognition (Joseph A. Johnson award) from the American Institute of Physics and the National Society of Black Physicists
• National Science Foundation gave him the CAREER award also for his 2D magnetic materials
• his paper on the 2-d magnetic materials was also one of the 100 downloaded papers in the materials sciences field as recognized by the scientific journal, Nature

Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Attempts were made to get other editors to chime in on the notability of the draft through the AfC process and the AfC Help desk, but to no success. Perhaps other editors like @Klbrain and @David Eppstein might be willing to take a look and share their opinions? Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:26, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that Rhone reaches WP:NACADEMIC; Scopus H-factor of 11, with the top 4 most highlight cited contributions being mid-author publications suggests that his individual impact isn't high. The awards are career-developements awards or insufficiently notable, so doesn't meet the prize criteria. So, WP:TOOSOON for a page. Klbrain (talk) 17:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

I also don't see a pass of WP:PROF yet. The strongest indicator is the CAREER award, which is not enough for notability yet by our standards (too many people get them) but is a sign that he's very likely going to get tenure, giving him time to build up his portfolio and eventually become notable. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Ok, then that's that. Thanks for chiming in yall. Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)