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 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
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article was accepted on 7 December 2014 by reviewer Vrac (talk·contribs).
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 Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics 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.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I have just reinstated some material on Macdonald polynomials that was earlier deleted by 73.89.25.252. This content, along with the title of Williams' dissertation (reinstated by someone else), was deleted because it was deemed not notable. Per WP:NNC notability guidelines do not apply to content within articles and therefore I reinstated it. Dash77 (talk) 17:19, 2 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
Virtually every mathematician listed in an encyclopedia has a Phd, so the thesis title is a sort of certificate without information content. Saying that Total Positivity is one of her areas of specialization, or saying nothing, or mentioning awards earned for her thesis, would all be better than transcribing details from her CV into the page just because they are online. Has her thesis title been reported in any published articles?
Similarly, the technical statement about MacDonald polynomials carries no indication that this is important within her body of work. She worked on lots of things, what is special about this ASEP characterization of the polynomials? At the level a short encyclopedia bio covers, it makes more sense to list her as, e.g., an expert on MacDonald polynomials (or whichever other areas make sense to list), rather than giving a chunk of text that even most mathematicians wouldn't understand. 73.89.25.252 (talk) 22:17, 2 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
As stated in WP:NNC, notability is a core Wikipedia standard to be applied to decide what is (or is not) a suitable topic for a Wikipedia article, but is not a criterion for deciding what goes in an article once the decision is made to create the article. In this case, the article is rated as either Start or Stub class, meaning in general we should be looking to expand it, not cull down the already rather meager content. There is no particular reason for including this particular paper beyond the fact that Williams has co-authored with Corteel a number of times so including a sample of that collaboration makes sense. Beyond that, however, if there is nothing particularly special about this paper compared to other Williams papers, this article should be expanded by mentioning some of her other work, not by further contracting an article that is already too short. Again--notability is a criterion for deciding that there should be an article in the first place, but once an article exists not every statement in the article needs to be notable. Rewording the text to make it less specialized and more accessible to a general audience, however, may make sense. Dash77 (talk) 22:43, 2 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}