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 sourcedmust 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists articles
I think this article meets the notability criteria 1 (the person's work has been covered by New York Times, Forbes, and other major media outlets) and I also think it may meet criteria 2 (the Cottrell Scholar Award from Research Corporation and the CAREER award from the NSF). I am less sure about the second, but I am planning to remove the notability tag because I think it still meets criteria 1. ProfessorCuprous (talk) 15:01, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kj cheetham. Thanks for the explanation about awards. My mistake about CAREER. And in response to the comments about the NPR coverage: The article mentioned her name once, but the audio clip interviews her. And, the coverage is about a scientific publication in Scientific Advances in which she was one of the two lead authors. If you just search for her name in the text from that specific article, it seems like passing mention, but in the larger context it I think it is significant coverage of her work. Further, the coverage of her work extends far beyond that one NPR article. Her work is covered in outlets ranging across a broad range of target audiences and she is interviewed and/or named in all of them. ProfessorCuprous (talk) 18:34, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi ProfessorCuprous. I admit I'd not listened to the audio clip, but interviews are generally primary sources and we need secondary sources to show notability as per WP:PST. I'd also be looking for significant coverage of the person rather than just her work to meet WP:SIGCOV. I'm not convinced either way, so I'm not going to remove the tag myself (or take it to WP:AFD), but wouldn't object if someone uninvolved does. -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:42, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kj cheetham. Thank you for pointing out the difference between the academic criteria 2 WP:NPROF, and the more general notability criteria WP:GNG. I forgot to mention that in my earlier post. I also want to clarify, and perhaps get a better understanding about the coverage of Peleg's work and how it falls into notability. Regarding the NPR article where she was interviewed - it is not just an interview. It is coverage of her research in which she is interviewed and quoted explaining the research in her own words at some times. Most of the media coverage on scientific work is like this in my experience. The author of the news article summarizes the work and describes its meaning, and there are places where the scientist is interviewed, sometimes along with other scientists, describing the work in simple terms. I would say that the articles in NPR, The NY Times, and several other media outlets fall into this format. It is significant coverage of the work that this person has created, not necessarily on the person themselves. I don't think these are primary sources as far as I understand because the author of the article is synthesizing the message. And I do think its significant coverage of the person's work. If the coverage is on the work that the person did, not on the person itself, I think it still counts as notability for the person who did the work. I'd love for someone else to weigh in. ProfessorCuprous (talk) 18:58, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kj cheetham and ProfessorCuprous. I recently updated Dr. Peleg's page, and I would also advocate for removing the notability tag. My rationale is: (1) her citation percentile in physics and multidisciplinary sciences on Web of Science has been consistently high for a number of years, (2) her accumulation of prestigious early career awards (it's not clear to me from the notability criteria that early career awards are excluded, and she has a preponderance of them; given the number of Nobel Prize winners who first won Sloan Fellowships, I would argue that it is a prestigious award), (4) the WikiProject Women scientists is working to raise visibility of women scientists. Though she is rather young (but now a tenured Associate Professor), she is considered to be one of the leaders in the Physics of Living Systems. I have not been involved in one of these discussions on Wikipedia previously, though, and would welcome your thoughts! Moosling303 (talk) 18:01, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Early career awards don't carry much weight in terms of notabilty. Being a women isn't a factor in notability either. Being Associate Professor isn't really a factor in notability either, would need to be a named chair or similar to meet WP:NPROF #5 for instance. Not all full professors are notable. Looking at citations, at first glance I'd still be thinking potentially WP:TOOSOON, though she does have 3 papers as a co-author with over 100 on Google Scholar. Independant coverage is probably the main factor to show notability at the moment I think, especially if they show she is actually "considered to be one of the leaders in the Physics of Living Systems" - I've not checked. -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:39, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
