User talk:Sandstein

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: [[example article]].

If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Start a new talk topic

Deletion review for Sreenath Subrahmanyam

Hi Sandstein,

As you perhaps see, I created a detailed review of Sreenath Subrahmanyam in response to the other editors and there are compelling reasons for us to retain the page. Please see the extensive review that wrote in support of retention of the page. The academic introduced two new ideas to the field and these ideas are being followed from across the world.

I would like to take it through to formal stages of review process, as a next step.

If the independent reviewers think there is no enough merit, I would like to create a Stub page for Sreenath Subrahmanyam. Would you be in support of creating a stub page or a new page, if it gets to that stage. It looks like I need to write to you about this because, you were the one to finally take a call on deleting the page.

Tuckerbaba (talk) 10:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a link to what you are talking about. Sandstein 10:44, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sandstein,

The page I was referring to is Sreenath Subrahmanyam

I wrote a detailed commentary, which presents extensive references to how the the academics' ideas have been instrumental in opening up new opportunities in his field of expertise.

Below is the summary of my extensive analysis. Clearly the academics' contribution is compellingly significant. The extensive summary got embedded into "Collapsed LLM Content", which you may not have had the opportunity to read.

I have pasted them below for your consideration. You will notice phenomenal contributions by the academic.

Thank you Sandstein,

The academic easily qualifies under the following (1) WP:PROF#C1; (2) WP:PROF#C2; (3) WP:PROF#C3; and (4) WP:PROF#C4;

1 WP:PROF#C1

The Academic has made several significant impacts in Sensors, and I draw the following information for support.

1.1 The academic was the first to develop a new method of imprinting technology, and several research groups have adopted this new technology. The article discusses the introduction of this new idea and its applications in several research areas, which have proven to be true over the years. The citation score is a testimony to this [1]. The academic is the first author in the publication.

1.2 To support 1.1 above, please refer to the Wikipedia article that discusses the new "bite and switch" tool developed by the author and provides several examples of applications of the idea. [Please review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_imprinting]

1.3 "Nature reviews chemistry", one of the reputed Journals has cited the authors work and further confirms that the novel method introduced by the author has been instrumental in the development of sensors. The author is the first author here https://www.nature.com/articles/s41570-022-00439-w (Please see reference #60 on the article)

1.4 The other manuscript that copiously cites the academic's work has the following to say. "20 functional monomers were initially assessed for their interaction energy with the template ephedrine in both charged and neutral states [328]. Selected monomers were then used for polymer synthesis, but also subjected to further MD simulations together with template, cross-linker, and solvent, where the observed interactions could be correlated with experimental binding data. This approach has since been adapted several times in the literature [329,330,331,332,333,334,335,336,337,338,339,340,341,342,343,344,345,346,347,348,349,350,351,352,353]. (Please see https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/13/17/2841)

1.5 Another study confirms that the authors' work was the primary precedent for computational functional monomer selection (Please see Hsieh R‑Y, Tsai H‑A, Syu M‑J (2006) “Designing a molecularly imprinted polymer as an artificial receptor for the specific recognition of creatinine in serums.” Biomaterials 27 (9): 2083–2089)

1.6 Another independent study published in a major journal confirms that the authors' "bite‑and‑switch" strategy was the first study and one that is instrumental in designing selective creatinine Molecularly imprinted polymer. (Please see 2. Miura C., Funaya N., Matsunaga H., Haginaka J. (2013) “Monodisperse, molecularly imprinted polymers for creatinine by modified precipitation polymerization and their applications to creatinine assays for human serum and urine.” Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 85: 288–294. doi:10.1016/j.jpba.2013.07.038)

1.7 The citation below talks about how the authors' work formed the conceptual framework for developing new tests for serum sample analysis. (Please see 3. Wei F., Cheng S., Korin Y., Reed EF., Gjertson D., Ho CM., Gritsch HA., Veale J. (2012) “Serum creatinine detection by a conducting‑polymer‑based electrochemical sensor to identify allograft dysfunction.” Analytical Chemistry 84 (18): 7933–7937. doi:10.1021/ac3016888

1.8 The academic has another paper as a first author in Advanced Materials (with an incredibly high impact factor of 28.7), and the work highlights that a novel material has been introduced into the field. The Journal is the best in the category for the specialization and this is widely discussed everywhere on the internet.

1.9 Another prescient article by the author was clearly ground-breaking. Analytical Chemistry invited the author to write about the new work that he introduced to the field. The author published the article as a perspective article and the academic was the first author on the article. Please see https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ac025673%2B

Perspective articles are written by experts who offer new direction and new vision to the field. Here is what the Analytical Chemistry Journal has to say about perspectives to show that the author is indeed a pioneer in the field.

"If Reviews are authoritative and Features are educational, then what are Perspectives? This may be the most misunderstood manuscript type, or at least, they were the category that I least understood when I started serving as an Associate Editor several years ago. Perspectives describe the authors’ vision of a specific topic and perhaps point to a new direction for this topic. They oftentimes include an analysis of current research that provides a foundation for the new direction or highlights new opportunities for growth in the field. Perspectives also provide an opportunity for an author to predict the future of their field and, of course, justify their vision. Unlike Features, Perspectives are aimed at specialists in the field, and their writing reflects this orientation". The author's visionary article came on the cover of the Journal.

(Please see https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ac300107q)

1.10 The perspective article discussed in 1.9 has been a basic foundation for nearly 50 research groups across the world. I present one here as a representation...... The group of David G. Myszka from the School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, has written in many of their publications that they and their group have investigated the hypothesis published by the academic and have developed purification and characterization methods for some sensing elements. Many publications by at least 25 other research groups on the internet cite the perspective article as the foundation for their research. For want of time and space, I stop short of discussing all of them here.

2 WP:PROF#C2

Wiki Criteria#2 confirms that "Some less significant academic honors and awards that confer a high level of academic prestige can also be used to satisfy Criterion 2" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics)#C1

The author has won several prestigious awards, such as (a) Commonwealth Award (Commonwealth Countries) (b) Kings Norton Award (UK) (c) National Institutes of Health, US (d) Endeavour Award (Australia) (e) Marie Curie (EU). The Wikipedia Criteria explains that " Some less significant academic honors and awards that confer a high level of academic prestige can also be used to satisfy Criterion 2" and therefore the academic satisfies WP:PROF#C2

3 WP:PROF#C3

3.1 The author is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Biology (FRSB). "Fellowship of the Royal Society of Biology (FRSB), previously Fellowship of the Society of Biology (FSB), is an award and fellowship granted to individuals that the Royal Society of Biology has adjudged to have made a "prominent contribution to the advancement of the biological sciences". Fellows are entitled to use the post-nominal letters FRSB. As of 2016, examples of fellows include Sir David Attenborough, Martin Hume Johnson, Jasmin Fisher, Sir Tom Blundell, and Dame Nancy Rothwell. See the Category: Fellows of the Royal Society of Biology for more examples" (Please review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Society_of_Biology) (Please also see https://thebiologist.rsb.org.uk/meet-our-members/member-profiles-6)

3.2 The author is also a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry (FRSC). "The Fellowship of the Royal Society of Chemistry (FRSC) is one of the most prestigious awards. Existing Fellows include award-winning scientists and Nobel prize winners" (Please review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fellow_of_the_Royal_Society_of_Chemistry#:~:text=Fellowship%20of%20the%20Royal%20Society,of%20the%20RSC%20Applications%20Committee)

3.3 The academic has been adjudged as a scientist of extraordinary ability in the Sciences by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services [From the academic's University Webpage]

4 WP:PROF#C4

The following book chapters have wide coverage on the internet with explanations on specific contributions made to the ideas presented in there, which are instrumental in designing novel materials. Providing specific examples would make this message longer.

Combinatorial Methods for Chemical and Biological Sensors https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-0-387-73713-3

Computational Design of Molecularly Imprinted Polymers https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-0-387-73713-3_6

5 Additional Comments

5.1 There are compelling reasons to believe that both the comments @Sexy Scientist has made are because they are either a competitor or have an agenda that is probably adversarial. For example, the comment "low quality papers" can be made only if one has specialized in an area. Furthermore, the comment "low rung scientist" again confirms that there is a natural competition between Sreenath Shurahmanyam and @Sexy Scientist. I invited @Sexy Scientist to respond, and I have not heard from them as yet. It is therefore understandable that "Article was originally tagged by User: @Sexy scientist without any proper follow-up"

5.2 @Sexy Scientist wrote that the "popular articles" section presents the cited articles of the author when this is factually untrue, likely because of personal bias or competition from peer-pressure (Please review my previous comments). I explained it last week and invited @ Sexy Scientist to respond, but we have not heard from them yet

6 Summary:

Editors: Many thanks to all of you for your comments. I truly appreciate your time. I have created wiki articles for many accomplished professors from around the world in the last several years. I enjoy doing it, and this also helps me grow intellectually. This is one of the primary reasons why I have dug deep to respond to this article.

THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAIL

Thank you, Liz et al, for your time. Tuckerbaba (talk) 16:43, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TLDR. Also I'm not responding to LLM-written comments. Sandstein 13:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You do not have to respond to the LLM written comments, but your judgement could be based on what has been written there. Afterall, there is clear and categorical evidences here. Tuckerbaba (talk) 15:24, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, if you want to recreate Sreenath Subrahmanyam, I advise you to write a draft that clearly establishes notability, and then to submit it to WP:AFC, which is the only "formal review process" we have. Sandstein 17:28, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I will do this, now that I have spoken to you. I will however want to submit a formal deletion review for the deleted article. There is overwhelming merit and one could clearly see this. Tuckerbaba (talk) 01:02, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you happy that I submit a formal deletion review for Sreenath Subrahmanyam? Just wanted to get your consent before going ahead. Tuckerbaba (talk) 05:59, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's up to you, I don't mind. Sandstein 06:43, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you mate. Appreciate this. As I wrote, there are compelling reasons which I will describe on the submission. I would appreciate if you are able to take a closer look. Cheers Tuckerbaba (talk) 07:40, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day, Sandstein, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 04:29, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, mate. Tuckerbaba (talk) 05:57, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sreenath Subrahmanyam

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sreenath Subrahmanyam. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tuckerbaba (talk) 11:18, 4 August 2025 (UTC) ==[reply]

Hi Sandstein,

As discussed last week, I have requested a deletion review for the article. I have compiled evidence from a variety of sources and as you can see, there is phenomenal evidence to recognize the contribution. I would appreciate if you could take some time to read it. Thank you Tuckerbaba (talk) 11:18, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting for undeletion of Article "Dinesh_Kalaiselvan"

Hi Sandstein,

Thank you for your contribution over wikipedia. Recently I found that you have deleted the article Dinesh Kalaiselvan where I compiled enough resources from various trustable platform from South India. I request you to spare some time to dive deeper into the article and revert back. Thank you! DineshKalaiselvan (talk) 04:28, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, because you yourself are Dinesh Kalaiselvan and therefore have a WP:COI in editing it. Writing autobiographies is forbidden on Wikipedia. Sandstein 05:38, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I am not Dinesh Kalaiselvan. I am new to wikipedia. So I created the username same as article. Could you please guide me how to change username please 157.51.139.226 (talk) 06:23, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I don't believe you. Sandstein 06:44, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So what should I do now. Have to create new username with the article. Then again you will raise warning like multiple articles found sockpuppet etc... Again it will be deleted for speedy deletion. Again I have to request for undeletion. I am writing behalf of him. Right person should get recognised. 157.51.139.226 (talk) 07:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"I am writing behalf of him" - which still means you have a COI. I will not respond further. Sandstein 10:33, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a experienced writer I expected you to guide new users like me . Anyhow thank you for your time and contributions.Toshimina (talk) 11:39, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Results of the 2005 Quebec municipal elections in Abitibi-Témiscamingue

A bunch of these were nominated by Chidgk1. OwenX closed most of them as redirect. You closed this one as delete. Liz relisted one of them. These are all in similar shape and probably should receive similar outcome.

~Kvng (talk) 12:26, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping, Kvng! I went ahead and closed #2 as redirect, in line with how 6 of the other 7 were closed. As for the remaining one, I believe we have verifiability (but not notability!) via primary sources, allowing us to keep the history behind the redirect. Anyone may create a redirect at Results of the 2005 Quebec municipal elections in Abitibi-Témiscamingue, but I'll let Sandstein decide on whether to undelete the history behind such a redirect. Owen× ☎ 12:46, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kvng, feel free to redirect. I see no need to undelete the deleted content. Sandstein 13:46, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]