Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?

415 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level (2007, methodology): “It has been calculated in different fields such as physics (Hirsch, 2005), biomedicine (Bornmann & Daniel, 2005), information science (Cronin & Meho, 2006), and business (Saad, 2006).”
What do we know about the h index? (2007, background): “The results of the study by Bornmann and Daniel (2005b) show that the h indices of approved applicants are on average higher than those of rejected applicants.”
Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? (2005, neutral): “[7] L.”
Library 2.0: A guide to participatory library service (2008, neutral): “These results are reported in Bornmann and Daniel (2005a, 2007a) .”
Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar (2007, background): “More complete citation counts can also help generate more accurate h-index scores for authors and journals (Bar-Ilan, 2006; Bornmann & Daniel, 2005, 2007; Cronin & Meho, 2006; Hirsch, 2005; Oppenheim, 2007) and journal impact factors (Garfield, 1996, 2006; Nisonger, 2004b; Saha, Saint, &…”