Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maya Nasr

Maya Nasr

[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)

Postdoctoral scientist at Harvard with an h-factor of 6 and 420 total citations. While she has made a good start to her career, she is some distance from passing WP:NPROF. Some graduate-level awards, and some minor coverage; not close to WP:SIGCOV for WP:GNG. I suspect that in 10 years or so she will pass the bar for notability, maybe even a few years earlier, but now is way WP:TOOSOON. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Astronomy, and Physics. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lebanon and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with nom. A highly successful subject who does not pass notability here. Lots of trivial mentions, primary sources, etc. used as sources which do not contribute to notability, and the article is largely a promotional showcase with a non-neutral point of view. There is a very real possibility that she will become quite notable in the future (but we are not a crystal ball). Just as a side note, the article was created by a single purpose account in 2022. GuardianH 21:20, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (sigh). This is one of the most well-written, helpful articles to not pass WP:N I've ever seen, I suggest that one principal editor retain a copy in user space or offline to safe the trouble of future recreation (Draftify is probably not an option since we're between 3-8 years from passing WP:PROF if I can use prior experience as a guide). But it's definitely not a WP:PROF pass at present -- agree with all of Ldm1954 and GuardianH assessments on overall notability. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 22:20, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, agree with Mscuthbert about this being the best written but non-notable article I've seen. I do hope an article will be warranted in due time. As above _{so below} 23:06, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I believe this article might squeak by WP:BASIC with two UPI Space Daily articles about the subject [1], [2] (need Proquest access to view) and a few paragraphs in an article written by a NYTimes reporter [3]. I have added these to the article. There are other references but I can't find editorial oversight so not sure if they count as reliable. I wouldn't characterize the article as written by an SPA account but rather a student who worked on several articles, although contributed most to this one. If the UPI Space Daily references count towards notability I'd !vote weak keep. Nnev66 (talk) 18:30, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom and above. Svartner (talk) 00:21, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you comment on the references added to the article? The statement "per nom and above" does not address them as they were added later. Nnev66 (talk) 02:32, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]