Talk:Yakiv Pavlenko

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: With an h-factor of 28 and 2574 citations in Google Scholar notability is dubious as he had no major awards (or none mentioned here). The claim of more than 300 papers looks odd.

Ldm1954 (talk) 16:53, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Specific_criteria_notes, article meets at least one criterie:

2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level: He recived State Prize of Ukraine in Science and Technology (national level), Prize after Barabashov of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine [uk] (national level) and the «Basic Sciense Book Award» of International Academy of Astronautics (international level) Appsoft4 (talk) 18:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Appsoft4, not really. When I look at the State Prize, not only was this joint but a very large number of others received it. The award is for a paper, not for a major achievement so does not qualify under #C2. The second might, I am not certain. A Book Award does not.

As mentioned before, the claim of 300 papers is unverified and should be removed unless you can provide evidence.

Please do not remove tags, that is very rude. Fix everything (there are many other issues) then request that the tag be removed. Ldm1954 (talk) 20:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I look at the State Prize, not only was this joint but a very large number of others received it.

There is no such exclusion reason for Criterion 2, so here it is only your own opinion.

Anyway, Second and Third awards fits to Criterion 2:

"Some less significant academic honors and awards that confer a high level of academic prestige can also be used to satisfy Criterion 2. Examples may include certain awards, honors and prizes of notable academic societies, of notable foundations and trusts (e.g., the Guggenheim Fellowship, Linguapax Prize), etc."

, and so I would remove questioned notability template again.

If you want to help improve article, help to find more sources and add more references.

Do not add unrelated templates basing on your own opinion. Appsoft4 (talk) 21:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you do that without validating statements such as 300 papers it becomes a candidate for a wider discussion on notability. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

300 papers verified via ORCID, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yakiv_Pavlenko#c-Appsoft4-20241029212500-Ldm1954-20241029203100 Appsoft4 (talk) 21:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned before, the claim of 300 papers is unverified and should be removed unless you can provide evidence.

On his ORCID page, there are 321 publications listed at the moment: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7615-4028 Appsoft4 (talk) 21:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]