Could not load that page.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Machta

☆ Save On Wikipedia ↗
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. Star Mississippi 18:10, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Benjamin Machta

Benjamin Machta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Page on an associate professor of physics at Yale written by an assistant professor in the same department; one of many created directly in main despite obvious COI. With an h-factor of 25 and 3.5K citations, insufficient citations to pass WP:NPROF#C1, awards are all early career so do not contribute to a pass of WP:NPROF. No SIGCOV, so fails WP:GNG as well. He may be notable in 5 years, but currently this is WP:TOOSOON. Ldm1954 (talk) 11:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

icon
This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Keep per WP:NPROF#C2. Disclosure: I am a faculty member in the Yale Department of Physics and know the subject professionally. I am commenting here because I believe the notability arguments merit a response, but I understand if editors weigh my input accordingly. I appreciate the concerns raised by Ldm1954, Kelob2678, Athel cb, and Iljhgtn, and want to address them directly.
The Simons Investigator in Mathematical Modeling of Living Systems (MMLS) is a highly prestigious, nationally competitive award from a major foundation (assets >$5 billion). In 2019, the MMLS program appointed up to 7 investigators from a pool where each university in the US, Canada, UK, and Ireland could submit a maximum of two nominations. Nominees are not informed they are being considered — the program has been compared to the MacArthur "genius grants" in its selection process. There are currently 66 articles in Category:Simons Investigator, establishing clear precedent that this award satisfies C2. WP:NPROF C2 explicitly identifies "honors and prizes of notable foundations and trusts (e.g., the Guggenheim Fellowship)" as qualifying, and the Simons Investigator is directly comparable in selectivity and prestige.
Kelob2678 raises a fair point about h-index, but the comparison to James Sethna (h-index 77) is misleading — Sethna is a senior full professor with ~30 additional years of publication history. Comparing a mid-career theorist to their doctoral advisor's lifetime metrics doesn't tell us much. H-index is also strongly field-dependent; theoretical biophysics and statistical mechanics are small fields with modest citation norms compared to, e.g., genomics or machine learning. WP:NPROF itself notes that "the criteria, in practice, vary greatly by field." Machta has first-author publications in Science, Physical Review Letters, Nature Physics, PNAS, and Nature Communications, and ~3,500 total citations for a theorist who received his PhD in 2013. His 2013 Science paper was featured in the Journal Club for Condensed Matter Physics. Even if C1 alone is debatable, these indicators — combined with the Simons Investigator and APS DBIO Early Career Award — contribute to satisfying C1 under the "other considerations" provision.
Ldm1954 describes the awards as "all early career," but the Simons Investigator is not an early-career award in the usual sense — it targets "outstanding scientists" in "their most productive years" and requires institutional nomination. The MMLS variant does require nominees to be within 10 years of their first faculty appointment, but the selection criteria are based on demonstrated scientific accomplishment, not potential. The APS DBIO Early Career Award is separately notable as an award from a major division of the American Physical Society.
On WP:COI: this is about the editor, not the subject. COI-created articles are routinely kept when the subject is independently notable. The appropriate remedy is tagging for independent review, not deletion.
Iljhgtn mentions WP:TOOSOON, and I understand the instinct, but Machta has been on the Yale faculty since 2018 and received the Simons Investigator in 2019 — seven years ago. His research program is well established.
Finally, on WP:GNG and the absence of significant coverage: for academics, WP:NPROF is the relevant guideline, not WP:GNG. WP:NPROF exists precisely because most academics — even highly notable ones — do not receive extensive coverage in mainstream media. A single satisfied NPROF criterion is sufficient for notability. ChiaraMingarelli (talk) 22:45, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
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.