Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Lee (mathematician)

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--Ymblanter (talk) 06:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Lee (mathematician)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article reads like a CV. Notability is not established. Citation sources are not notable (his university and related websites). The only links from other articles come from their Further Reading sections, all for the same book. Labalius (talk) 02:21, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. Nominator has clearly not paid any attention to WP:PROF and has provided a faulty nomination statement — Incoming links and quality of sourcing are not notability criteria. Subject passes crieteria #C1 (highly cited publications [1] in a low-citation field), #C3 (fellow of INFORMS), and #C5 (named chair at an R1 university). Any one of these would be enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:38, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep. For all of Eppstein's reasons, but C5 (named chair) is enough. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 04:29, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Holder of a named chair at a major university. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. Yes, I think it would be good form for the nom to withdraw. This one is just wasting editors' valuable time. Agricola44 (talk) 19:41, 1 July 2015 (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.