Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ligong Chen

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) 21:26, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ligong Chen[edit]

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

Lack of notability. Skbkekas (talk) 03:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: does not satisfy WP:ACADEMIC criteria. —3mta3 (talk) 09:20, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Part of a massive walled garden that includes also functionalized general trichotomic regression analysis, fullwise regression analysis, convergence rate of residuals, Center for Prostate Diseases Research, functionalized general trichotomy, continuity test, threshold in piecewise regression analysis, and many related redirects, dab pages, and redlinks. None of these topics appear to meet WP:GNG and Chen does not seem to meet WP:PROF. All should be deleted. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Continuity test seems to be two articles now, the original one having to do with electronics and a new one added recently by User:Yuanfangdelang. It would probably be best just to revert the additions in this case.--RDBury (talk) 02:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It might also be worthwhile to check Weighted_PRA, Uniformed_Services_University_of_the_Health_Science, Enforced_continuity, Piecewise_regression_analysis & Constant_expectation_(statistics).--RDBury (talk) 02:10, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What a mess You have to read several sentences into the article before you come to anything about the alleged grounds for notability. Is he a politician, a novelist, a theologian, an athlete,.....or what?? If the article is kept, it should get drastically cleaned up. I'll be back....... Michael Hardy (talk) 02:08, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No mathematical hits on GS. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:13, 29 January 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Delete No evidence of notability per either WP:BIO or WP:PROF. GS[1] shows nothing relevant (note that there is a chemist with the same name). Nsk92 (talk) 02:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--Kmhkmh (talk) 06:06, 29 January 2010 (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.