Talk:Reid W. Barton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Reid W. Barton is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics Competitions, a collaboration created to improve and create articles related to mathematics competitions. Also see the project page and assessment table. Note that you do not have to edit the table every time an article's rating is changed; this is done automatically every few days by a bot.

When rating this article, you probably should leave a comment.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.


Without doubt this gentleman is one of the greatest, if not greatest minds and achievers to have graced the International olympiads, but to write "academics in general" would seem to imply that he is one of the greatest ever mathematicians/computer scientists of all time. Blnguyen 05:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] WP: Notability

These articles all follow the same generic template: blah blah is a winner of (insert contest here), (insert contest here), and (insert contest here). Attended/is attending (insert university here) from (year) to (year) etc.

No doubt IMO, Putnam, etc. are significant competitions. But do we really need a separate article for every such winner? Might as well wait until they become professors and have actually published some papers, or made some other contribution to academia/society instead of simply winning a contest. Not to mention that these contests are directed towards the undergraduate/high school level.

See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tiankai_Liu and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Yi_Sun for other similar articles that passed AfD and were deleted for non-notability.

- Wikipedian06 07:24, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Barton seemingly satisfies the Academic Notability criterion 6: The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Debivort (talk • contribs) 10:08, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
He won the same honors that the other two did (now deleted articles). Wikipedian06 17:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Huh, I guess those other two deletions were mistakes then. Is there an Articles for Restoration procedure> Debivort 18:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Academic Notability criterion 6 refers to a "notable award" without, unfortunately, explaining what this is supposed to mean. But I think it is reasonable to interpret as covering awards given to academics for their academic work and not to student success in competitions and contests (note that competitions and contests are not part of the "adult" academic world). I don't think it should be applied to IMO and Putnam winners. Plclark 08:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)Plclark

Nothing in the criterion mentions that it applies to adults only - which would also introduce systemic bias. Debivort 21:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd love to understand why http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Penn_State_Nittany_Lions_football_team should be an article but people think we should delete Reid Barton, Gabriel Carroll, Tiankai Liu, et al. Rewarding mediocrity? 128.103.11.166 15:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I think this discussion has drifted too far from WP policy which is the means by which it should be resolved. Here is a reliable source about Barton's notability: [1]. Here's a published book about the contests. I think that's sufficient. Debivort 21:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


Not everybody who publishes a paper or wins some undergraduate prize is notable. Reid Barton is a good example of a person who is famous in a specific crowd (math competition people) and is essentially unknown outside of that crowd; this is not considered notable in Wikipedia. Doubtless one day he will be, but he's not there yet. 128.36.41.44 (talk) 18:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I really and truly doubt that even 5% of the population outside of the "math competition people" (and professional mathematicians as well) knows who Andrew Wiles is. Also, another book. Temperalxy 19:35, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Andrew Wiles is highly recognized in academia. IMO/Putnam medalists aren't. I've learned about Wiles in many math courses I took in college. On the other hand, I've never heard of the math olympiad winners outside of the winners' lists. Wikipedian06 (talk) 04:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
BTW, maybe I should start an AfD nom to get more opinions? Wikipedian06 (talk) 04:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Are we really still discussing this?? Start and AfD if you like - but whether or not you have heard about these people in (of all things) your courses, is not the criterion the evaluators at AfD will use. They will use the project wide criteria of Notability which have been demonstrated already. de Bivort 04:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Virtually EVERY single MINOR league hockey, basketball, football, and baseball player is on wikipedia. Virtually every single minor actor is listed on this - even if virtually no one knows who they are. And this gentleman, who has basically rewritten academic achievement at the college and high school level by winning competitions by almost unimaginable margins in some case - is not 'notable'? Alot of people look up Barton - relative to most minor league sports players and probably even some low level pro athletes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.158.30.212 (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)