Talk:senior researcher

RFD discussion: April–May 2022
Sum of parts Pious Eterino (talk) 13:05, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not senior + researcher (in which case &lit would be used in the def). Keep as a title. See senior researcher. ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  15:30, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If it isn’t SoP (I’m undecided), then it seems that the entry needs a regional label. It doesn’t seem like a term that’s widely used in many English-speaking countries. — Sgconlaw (talk) 22:13, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, SOP. The problem is that the definitions of as an adjective are confused and need to be improved. Here it is the same sense of senior as found in (e.g.) ', ', ', ..., '. The term senior researcher can be found used at the University of Oxford as well as at UCB.  --Lambiam 08:43, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per the tennis player test. Binarystep (talk) 01:07, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * It’s a job title, like assistant manager, not a profession. --Lambiam 07:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I'd support including as well. The line between a job title and a profession is a blurry one. Binarystep (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Now we're veering into the territory of civil service classifications. There are tons of them, complete with Roman numerals to distinguish pay grades. To a management analyst, the difference between a Management Analyst I, a Management Analyst II and a Management Assistant are quite important. For dictionary purposes, though- not so much. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that is entirely fair. Assistant manager is an extremely widespread position, and part of the common lexicon. Theknightwho (talk) 15:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per Binarystep. AG202 (talk) 00:19, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as SOP. I would suggest that WT:THUB supersedes the tennis player test (why else would we need this test?), and we don't have any translations at all here. This, that and the other (talk) 11:20, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Per the WP article, the title is used in former Soviet republics;, could you add Russian, etc. translations of this term? Thanks. ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  16:17, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I am not sure about idiomaticity of the term but I think you're referring to titles listed in this Russian Wikipedia article: научный сотрудник (with English correspondent titles). The title, literally senior scientific employee corresponds to senior researcher. The base Russian term (and its feminine equivalent) may merit an entry. The literal meaning scientific employee actually means a researcher in a scientific institution, not a scientific employee (literal meaning). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:04, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - it's a self contained term.
 * They're not a researcher who happens to be senior (in any sense), but a "senior researcher". It refers to a specific, distinct position.
 * You can't swap either term out for a synonym, because it's a self-contained term. The fact it happens to be is entirely down to its etymology, and has nothing to do with its use.
 * You can't place an adjective after "senior" as you could if it was genuinely acting as an adjective (e.g. "senior microbiology researcher" is not synonymous with "senior researcher in microbiology" when referring to that person's position as a senior researcher).
 * We can deal with the SoP sense with the &lit template, like we do on every other term like this.
 * As with any productive compounds, we add them if they can be attested, and don't if they can't. Nobody is suggesting we add, despite the existence of a single cite for it. Theknightwho (talk) 15:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 01:00, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. —Svārtava (t/u) • 08:42, 14 May 2022 (UTC)


 * RFD-kept: no consensus to delete. ·~   dictátor · mundꟾ  20:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)