Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dean Saluti

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 delete. Cirt (talk) 04:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dean Saluti

Contested prod; prod tag was removed without comment by the author, User:Deansaluti. Autobiography, fails notability, lack of signifant coverage in reliable, 2nd party sources. Some Google hits but it's all blogs and directories like LinkedIn. Two Google news hits, from 2002 and 2004, and coverage there is incidental rather than substantial. Delete. Dawn Bard (talk) 11:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- I'^mperator 12:13, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- I'^mperator 12:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. CEO of a company for which I am unable to find reliable sources despite a Google search, and the article shows no assertion of notability other than that for this man. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Although the article makes only a peripheral assertion of academic notability (by saying he was once a prof), I did check Web of Science for notable publications. The loosest criterion, "Author=(saluti d*)", turned up precisely one hit: ANALYSIS AND REDESIGN OF A MILITARY ORDERS PROCESSING SYSTEM (1986) by SHIMSHAK DG and SALUTI DJ, Comp. Ind. Eng. 10(3), 237-243. This paper has never been cited, moreover the db entry says that Shimshak is the corresponding author. I also double-checked notability from the commercial/business perspective (Google: 'saluti “process flow”') and indeed found it to be as Dawn Bard says: either "linkedin" pages, or pages whose URL begins with "saluticahn" (saluticahn.com/profile.asp, saluticahn.blogspot.com/, saluticahn.wordpress.com/, etc.). There appears to be an aspect of PR in this case too, for example the saluticahn.wordpress.com/ page says "[Dr. Dean Saluti] has published numerous articles and scholarly papers on “Process Flow,” and is considered a national authority on this subject" (emphasis mine), but this seems to be refuted by Web of Science. I think the verdict on this article is a clear-cut delete. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 16:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Delete I don't think he's notable from an academic standpoint and as owner of a small consulting company.Johndowning (talk) 21:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per Agricola44’s analysis, plus very low citation impact suggested by this search. Passes neither WP:PROF nor WP:BIO.--Eric Yurken (talk) 01:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 1. the fullest bio information seems to be at http://saluticahn.com/founder.asp. 2. WoS does not cover well the practical side of engineering, and especially not for someone working in the 70s and 80s. DGG (talk) 03:20, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As an academic, he is not in a sub-field of engineering, but rather in MIS/operations research, which are usually seen as sub-fields of management/business. Agricola44’s analysis is right on target; the subject is definitely not notable.--Eric Yurken (talk) 14:54, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article states: he received national recognition as an authority in the area of “process flow.” But although Google scholar has many highly cited papers on process flow, it has no hits for the conjunction of process flow with Saluti's last name and (like the other database searches described above) no other evidence of scholarly notability for Saluti. So although there is a claim in the article that could be construed as meeting WP:PROF #1, it doesn't seem to be borne out by the citation record. As for his company, the lack of hits for "Saluti Cahn" in Google News archive makes it clear enough that it is not notable and that his role as a principal of the company also does not make him notable. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:21, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteAcademically practically no search results, company looks like normal "small business" (without judgement), all that is not notable according to WP standards. Delete. --Esinclair52 (talk) 22:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.