Are these people "great scientists"?

[matcha]

I read this article about nobel prize winners who performed a robust "bells test" to validate quantum entanglement, but also goes through the history of Quantum theorists like Einstein to Bell to now the nobel prize winning experimental physicists. My question is more about personal development where if I read the article from a personal development perspective of "how could I imagine myself doing something similar" I become quite concerned. Like Bell's ideas were not recognized for many years, and he ended up dying before seeing the experimental results that showed "he was correct". One the early scientists name Clauser supposedly had to dumpster dive to get materials for his experiment and even then could only get something of a preliminary result. Like is this what it means/what it may take to be a "great scientist" or are these people not great scientists at all and I shouldn't see them as positive example?

 

There's a similar thread by @musicandmath111 on "What makes a good scientist?" where hopefully this thread can be grounded in say real life scientists and what can be learned from their life stories -- or is this just a faulty line of thought completely

[Leo Gura]

Science is group-think, so you'll have to play by their rules if you want them to accept you.

[Carl-Richard]

Yes they're great scientists.