Jump to content

User:Ruud Koot/Feed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AA: Computer science

[edit]

Articles for deletion

  • 27 Sep 2024 – Turing switch (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Helpful Raccoon (t · c) was closed as delete by Asilvering (t · c) on 04 Oct 2024; see discussion (2 participants)
  • 01 Sep 2024 – Aqua Security (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Dan Leonard (t · c) was closed as delete by OwenX (t · c) on 02 Oct 2024; see discussion (34 participants; relisted)

Categories for discussion

Requested moves

Articles to be merged

Articles to be split

Articles for creation

(5 more...)

AA: Computing

[edit]
Shortcut

Articles for deletion

(22 more...)

Proposed deletions

(2 more...)

Templates for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Files for discussion

Good article nominees

Requests for comments

Peer reviews

Requested moves

Articles to be merged

(19 more...)

Articles to be split

(16 more...)

Articles for creation

(30 more...)

AfD: Computing

[edit]

Computing

[edit]
[edit]
The Linux Link Tech Show (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject does not pass WP:N or WP:WEBCRIT and was WP:PRODed in 2012. The current sources are largely blogs, forums, interviews, or primary and I'm not finding much of anything else in a WP:BEFORE. TipsyElephant (talk) 15:05, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Cradlepoint

[edit]
Cradlepoint (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Scope creep previously PRODded this article, but it was procedurally dePRODded. The rationale was "Company article that fails WP:NCORP. References are routine business news. Fails WP:SIRS." Indeed, the coverage is routine and WP:ORGTRIV, and most of the sources are WP:TRADES. Janhrach (talk) 14:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete I never saw it was deproded or I would have sent it to Afd. It fails WP:NCORP. scope_creepTalk 14:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete nn business. Refs are regular PR stuff --Altenmann >talk 19:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Presumed security

[edit]
Presumed security (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A term seemingly coined by a single blog post. The post does not appear to have received secondary coverage and Wikipedia now seems to be primary source of the term. Brandon (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Check Point GO

[edit]
Check Point GO (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All coverage is WP:ROUTINE and the article is largely WP:PROMO. Allan Nonymous (talk) 20:32, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete - incredibly minor product offering from an otherwise notable company. Lack of sustained coverage reflects that. Brandon (talk) 04:40, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Check Point VPN-1

[edit]
Check Point VPN-1 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No real sources on this article demonstrating notability, and only one source I could find online. Fails WP:NCORP. Allan Nonymous (talk) 20:35, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete - incredibly minor product offering from an otherwise notable company. Lack of sustained coverage reflects that. Brandon (talk) 04:40, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep as vast amounts of literature were written on the subject, readily accessible through Google Books, including in bundled magazines. WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP also applies. gidonb (talk) 21:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Shalini Govil-Pai

[edit]
Shalini Govil-Pai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable individual. Refbombed primary sourced spam that screams of UPE. Lacks independent coverage about her. Awards are not major. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

CapROS

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
CapROS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced since 2006. No evidence of notability. Despite a comment saying "If ever it is decided that the notability of this topic cannot justify an article, then merge this article with the EROS article instead of deleting it", I don't actually see anything to merge as most of the article is dedicated to describing the concept of capability-based operating systems rather than about this one specifically. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Simon Crosby

[edit]
Simon Crosby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creepTalk 08:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep I disagree that most of the references given above are interviews; they are articles that partially quote him, but that is rather common for articles about a person. I find the Wired, the Register, Infoworld and CRN to be independent, and together they demonstrate notability. None provides a true biography, so hopefully that will come along in the future giving us more personal, rather than just professional, information. Lamona (talk) 22:33, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

AfD: Science

[edit]
Shortcuts


Science

[edit]

Warwick Ventures

[edit]
Warwick Ventures (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Low quality sourcing on the page, little else seen in good quality third party sources to show that this subject has notability outside of University of Warwick. Anything which has significance could be merged there. JMWt (talk) 09:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Lectka enantioselective beta-lactam synthesis

[edit]
Lectka enantioselective beta-lactam synthesis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A couple of primary sources in the scientific literature do not show this topic meets WP:GNG, nor does it demonstrate that the topic merits a named reaction after the corresponding author. The current content is likely inaccessible to most readers. There may be some content that could be merged into β-Lactam#Synthesis. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

IC 167

[edit]
IC 167 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Could not find any individual coverage on this object. Should redirect to List of IC objects.

Added after Praemonitus's vote: While there is coverage of the group it is a part of, I couldn't find any coverage of the object specifically. SirMemeGod  18:54, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Astronomy. SirMemeGod  18:54, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
  • It's borderline. I find brief discussions of IC 167 in a few studies, particularly of the NGC 697 group. Praemonitus (talk) 13:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 22:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

  • Weak keep – Per Praemonitus. Potential academic interest due to interaction with NGC 694. Svartner (talk) 05:22, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:59, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep, per WP:NASTRO. Though individual coverage of the topic is rare, there is "significant commentary" on this object. Interaction with NGC 694 is also of academic interest, per Svartner. Pygos (talk) 03:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Science Proposed deletions

[edit]

Science Miscellany for deletion

[edit]

Science Redirects for discussion

[edit]
This section is transcluded from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 30. (edit | history)
Disambiguate Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Disambiguate


Deletion Review

[edit]

AfD: Academics

[edit]

Academics and educators

[edit]

Kenneth Mims

[edit]
Kenneth Mims (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

High school teacher who founded an interesting academy in Phoenix. While the academy might be notable, he does not inherit the notability. Much of the article is about the academy, not him. I see nothing substantive enough on him. Notability was questioned in August; I see no change and no notability. Ldm1954 (talk) 20:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 20:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arizona, Georgia (U.S. state), Pennsylvania, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep Won an award from the US Department of Energy for STEM teaching. Some of the articles that appear to be about the academy have lengthy information about him, e.g. this. There are some non-independent references that need to be removed, but enough remain to show notability. Lamona (talk) 15:27, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
    Comment: I looked carefully at that DOE award. It provides a $7,500/month stiped providing "the opportunity to work in a Federal agency or in a U.S. Congressional office" quote taken from BNL site. As such I do not classify it as a major award that would sustain a notability claim, sorry. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:57, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Allen Mendenhall

[edit]
Allen Mendenhall (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable individual. Refbombed primary sourced spam that screams of UPE. Lacks independent coverage about him. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

William John Veale

[edit]
William John Veale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable teacher/secondary school administrator. Both sources in-article are affiliated with the subject's school. Having an MBE, the lowest and most common class within the Order, is not considered a WP:ANYBIO #1 pass on its own. No additional qualifying sources for WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, or WP:NACADEMIC come up in WP:BEFORE search. (I would have draftified this page, but since it was created 11 months ago as the page creator's sandbox but only moved to mainspace today, it's not eligible for draftification and AfD it is.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 18:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

THis was an improper move to Draft space and has been moved back. ~ GB fan 15:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Joan Catoni Conlon

[edit]
Joan Catoni Conlon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:NACADEMIC. Esprit15d • talk • contribs 15:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Marie Margaret Keesing

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Marie Margaret Keesing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not pass WP:ACADEMIC. Reasons given for notability are co-authoring books with husband. I understand it is difficult to know who is responsible for the written work in these circumstances, but I think co-authoring books that do not have their own article is a difficult justification for an article- I would suggest a merge with her Husband's article maybe (her husband is clearly notable as president of a learned body). I feel very bad about doing this, however, as obviously I do not want to underplay women's accomplishments in scientific fields. Spiralwidget (talk) 15:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Comment: She's mentioned quite a bit in Gscholar [11] for example, but I suspect it was due to the era in which she lived and gender bias that "minimized" her contributions for lack of a better term. The 50s and 60s was still early for female scientists to be taken as equals to males. Oaktree b (talk) 15:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep: This paper from 2015 seems to give her a proper discussion [12]. I think she's notable. Oaktree b (talk) 15:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep I sympathise with the proposer's dilemma. Although in Wikipedia terms "president of a learned body" gives us an easy basis for declaring someone notable, the lasting impact of this couple, and the real reason they're notable, is the anthropology they did, and their written output, not the husband's post. We cannot tease apart who contributed how much. Given that we don't know their relative contributions, deciding to put her contribution in an article with his name just feels too old-fashioned and patriarchal, as well as very arbitrary. Also, from a practical perspective, if we were to merge, her life prior to her marriage wouldn't fit well in her husband's article, giving too much weight to things that aren't directly about him; we'd have to consider moving the new merged article to "Felix Maxwell Keeling and Marie Margaret Keeling" or something like that, but then we'd need redirects anyway, so what's the point? "Keep" has the benefit of being a simple outcome to an inseparable duo. Elemimele (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Women, Social science, England, New Zealand, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep. As the co-author of Elite Communication in Samoa and Taming Philippine Headhunters, both of which seem to be significant books (I'm seeing lots of published scholarly reviews online, despite the fact they were published a long time pre-internet), she surely meets WP:AUTHOR. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep You should have followed your initial hunch: "I feel very bad about doing this". Back then, it was absolutely normal that a woman would publish together with her husband. Even if she was the major contributor, it would go out with the appearance that it was mainly the man's work. We should not be perpetuating this custom and either way, it's clear that they were both notable for their work in anthropology, even if it appears that he is the major author. Schwede66 18:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep -- per Schwede66 and Josh Milburn and other arguments. Additionally the Pan-Pacific Women's Association was a redlink in the article due to a typo but is a significant organization. Major evidence comes from the article Oaktree found, "Applied Anthropology and Interwar Internationalism: Felix and Marie Keesing and the (White) Future of the ʻNativeʼ Pan-Pacific" -- when researchers are being the subject of others' academic articles, it's a very strong sign of WP:PROF passing. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 09:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Weak delete or merge: weak delete because I agree with the points made above about women in science being overshadowed by men. However, we are not here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, as much as I would like to. I think the alternative of an article merge would be good, but would require a rewrite of both articles to create a "joint" article for the couple. David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 21:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Yury Antsiferov

[edit]
Yury Antsiferov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NAUTHOR, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Sources in the article are not great in establishing notability and BEFORE does not prove otherwise. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

I am the author of the article, so my voice doesn't count here, but since I was mentioned in the comments, I would like to share my thoughts. Firstly, Antsiferov is mentioned in several articles (for example, in relation to the State Duma elections and the case involving the Kremlin's attempt to sue him), both of which are quite high-profile and have been covered by many reputable media outlets. Secondly, he is the author of well-known textbooks in Russia, which are used by students at elite Russian universities (MGIMO, MSU). Madrugador88 (talk) 08:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
@Madrugador88 Oh your voice does count please, that's not how it works. The relationship to the State Duma elections and the case involving the Kremlin's attempt to sue him did not provide sufficient coverage to pass GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
In order for the textbooks to help towards Wikipedia:AUTHOR, they would need to be the subject of multiple independently published book reviews. For them to lead us to Wikipedia:Notability (academics), we'd need to see that they are being used by a large number of colleges and universities, with evidence for that (for example, if the publisher has put up a list of textbook adoptions). Qflib (talk) 13:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

List of presidents of Southern University

[edit]
List of presidents of Southern University (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced list of presidents, if content is with keeping it could easily be accommodated at the main article. AusLondonder (talk) 00:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Lists of people, and Louisiana. AusLondonder (talk) 00:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
    • Merge with Southern University. Southern University is obviously notable, but I don't think the list of presidents warrants its own article. Best to merge it into the university's article. Adding sources shouldn't be too hard; I've already found 2 independent sources talking about presidents of the university just from a quick Google.
    2601:246:5C80:65F0:8AE3:9A61:23A4:FB45 (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Merge. It doesn't have the independent coverage as a general topic to convince me of WP:NLIST, and it's only a dozen lines of tabular content; it could easily be merged into the main article without causing significant balance issues. An alternative possibility might be to split off History of Southern University as a separate article and include the presidency there, but currently the sourcing of the history section of the main article is so poor that I don't think it can support a separate article. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Merge is the best way to deal with this, for other schools this is the best way forward. I understand why someone would make this but still it's not really notable on it's own. Dr vulpes (Talk) 07:51, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Merge per above. Doesn't have stand alone notability as a list. Pinguinn 🐧 02:47, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Mong-Lan

[edit]
Mong-Lan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article looks like an autobiography, with all references from her website. Not sure if this person meets WP:GNG. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 13:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Women, Poetry, and Vietnam. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 13:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Bands and musicians, Dance, Arizona, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Visual arts. Netherzone (talk) 22:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment - at first glance she appears notable, but I will look deeper into the sources, as well as potential sources in a BEFORE search within the next few days before iVoting. It appears there are several SPA's who have worked on the article, however, that may or may not mean it's an autobio, which while strongly frowned upon, is not forbidden - if the person is notable. It may have influenced the neutrality of the article, so if it turns out that they meet notability criteria and the article is kept, it may need to be cleaned up. Netherzone (talk) 23:02, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment - this was my "last article before bed" AfD so I don't want to go down the complete rabbit hole it would take to make a definitive statement, but just from being adjacent to the poetry and translation world for a few years, the Pushcart prize is a big deal. It's not at the MacArthur/Oscar/Pulitzer level of presumed notability/speedy keep, but it's not a run-of-a-mill everyone pretty good has one at all. There are parts of the bio that probably don't help notability (the musical compositions have no publishers that would contribute to GNG or a music note), but the poetry looks more like it does -- Best American Poetry and the Pushcart anthology are quite heavy hitters. (If for some reason I don't get time to return to this, my gut is Keep). -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 09:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep: She has received more than three independent book reviews of more than one book, so I would argue she meets NAUTHOR. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 06:21, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep, met GNG before the nomination and with the added sources and work on the page since the nomination, good to go (stay). Randy Kryn (talk) 10:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:HEY. Thank User:Significa liberdade for cleaning up and adding sources for this article. Cherry Cotton Candy (talk) 14:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep passes WP:NAUTHOR as per the multiple reliable sources reviews added to the article references since nomination, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:08, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Vedprakash Dongaonkar

[edit]
Vedprakash Dongaonkar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPROF, WP:WRITER or WP:ANYBIO. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Joan Lee Tu

[edit]
Joan Lee Tu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This person does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Her master's thesis garnered a major burst of one-off media coverage, but that does not satisfy notability requirements per WP:BLP1E. WhinyTheYounger ※ Talk 14:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Jonny Griffiths

[edit]
Jonny Griffiths (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Mathematician who self-publishes by the looks of it. Fails WP:SIGCOV. UPE. Fails WP:BIO. Its likely him. scope_creepTalk 14:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Noah Giansiracusa

[edit]
Noah Giansiracusa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails WP:NACADEMIC and references could not prove WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Just as Ldm1954 stated on the talk page, this is indeed WP:TOOSOON. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Mathematics, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 09:34, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete: Utterly unremarkable minor academic, fails NPROF and the GNG going away. Ravenswing 06:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. Citation record not strong enough to carry the article in the absence of anything else that contributes to notability. I didn't find any reviews of his one book, and even if I did one book isn't generally enough for WP:AUTHOR. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete. His citation record is not as yet strong enough to qualify. He is doing some interesting things with opinion pieces etc, and these are beyond routine. However, I don't see enough as yet for notability. I think it is too soon, but he is on an interesting path and may well qualify in 2-3 years. Ldm1954 (talk) 11:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete Gumshoe2 (talk) 02:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. He fails all the parts of the PROF test, and writing opinion pieces is ordinary. Bearian (talk) 02:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Weak delete. One highly cited publication does not make WP:NPROF C1. The efforts at being a public intellectual might eventually lead to a pass of WP:NPROF C7, but I am as yet unconvinced. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 08:03, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Evidence re: PROF#C2 has not been refuted. Owen× ☎ 21:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Ahmed Almheiri

[edit]
Ahmed Almheiri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Assistant professor who does not come close to meeting WP:NPROF, one of two created recently directly to main space by an editor with only a few edits. Not enough publications, no major awards. Article was draftified on WP:NPP and tagged for notability, but tag was removed and it was immediately moved back to main space with the claim "meets Wikipedia standards". I think an easy case of Delete. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 13:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment: He has made a good start, and the joint awarding (with three others) of the Breakthrough prize in 2021 is a plus; please note that this was awarded to three groups that year, a total of nine people. I am sure that if his career continues to move forward he will qualify under WP:NPROF in a few years, but currently it is WP:TOOSOON. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:28, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
Ahmed Almheiri has received the New Horizons Breakthrough Prize in Physics and the Pride of Emirates medal which are quite notable achievements. He also has an individual paper with more than 1500 citations and has contributed significantly to his field just in the last decade. Age and institutional title should not be the measuring stick for eligibility of having a wikipedia page. Consider for example the Wikipedia page of Netta Engelhardt who received the Breakthrough Prize alongside Ahmed Almheiri. This shows that the article deserves to live in Wikipedia and in no way is an "easy case of Delete". Shoy.ouseph (talk) 14:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 16:04, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Canada, California, and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:22, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep. The Breakthrough Prize is very high-profile, I think enough for WP:PROF#C2. It's hard to judge his citation record for #C1 because this is a high-citation field but he does have high citations as well. Assistant professors are generally not notable unless we have evidence that they are already recognized as a star in their field (not just a promising new researcher) but I think the Breakthrough Prize is that recognition that we're looking for. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep Bluelinked prize (Breakthrough) and we can presume notability right there. Other than that, he just about squeaks WP:GNG on media coverage alone. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:26, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Simon Crosby

[edit]
Simon Crosby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creepTalk 08:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:39, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep I disagree that most of the references given above are interviews; they are articles that partially quote him, but that is rather common for articles about a person. I find the Wired, the Register, Infoworld and CRN to be independent, and together they demonstrate notability. None provides a true biography, so hopefully that will come along in the future giving us more personal, rather than just professional, information. Lamona (talk) 22:33, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Jose Santos Rios

[edit]
Jose Santos Rios (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete for failure to meet WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. The Senate Resolution and the House Resolution indicate that while very accomplished, this individual would receive run of the mill coverage of a typical mayor in the United States. Mpen320 (talk) 18:25, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Politicians, and Oceania. Shellwood (talk) 18:54, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep - mayors in a smaller territory like the CMNI have a greater influence on its politics than a similar municipality in Texas for example. As mayor of Saipan, its capital, Santos Rios represented the majority of the population of the Northern Mariana Islands. Anyone elected to this particular elected office is as influential within the CMNI as other "territorial-wide" elected politicians, and Santos is no exception. Scanlan (talk) 12:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Reply. Can you explain how he meets WP:GNG then? Similar mayors of cities in the continental United States do not necessarily qualify on basis of their influential position alone, but some like Wilmot Collins of Helena, Montana do.--Mpen320 (talk) 15:04, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  • weak keep: The islands are tiny and don't have many media outlets, so coverage is sparse to begin with. [21] and [22] are coverage about the nomination and award. Oaktree b (talk) 20:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete: Notability has not been demonstrated. Deb (talk) 13:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletions

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ruud_Koot/Feed&oldid=807663388"