Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sergiu P. Pașca

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 no consensus. Sandstein 19:11, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sergiu P. Pașca[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

A young assistant professor with a fairly low h-count. Maybe in a few years, but for now, there's no real indication of WP:PROF notability. - Biruitorul ^Talk 15:29, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:PROF with highly cited works as shown by google scholar here. The article also seems well sourced. Atlantic306 (talk) 15:41, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "Highly cited" is vague; h-index of 14 is specific. And we don't typically keep articles on academics with such low h-index scores.
- As for the sourcing in the article, 11 of 18 sources are the subject's own papers or citations thereof; a further 5 are his homepage or pages from organizations that gave him awards/grants; 1 is a dead link; and just 1 is an (entirely softball) interview. Independent sources are not exactly in abundance. - Biruitorul ^Talk 17:57, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:54, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 03:18, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Based on cited works found here [1], subject should merit a page in Wikipedia based on WP:PROF. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 04:28, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:59, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 10:56, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 10:56, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think that despite his low h-index and assistant professor rank, he meets WP:BIO as evidenced by these reliable sources: [2] [3] [4] Everymorning talk to me 16:00, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The relevant standard is WP:PROF, He has neither the rank to let us assume likely notability, not the citations to show hs is an infleunce on the field. The sort of publicity he gets as an attractive young person is PR and puffery, not responsible reporting int the field. The way I see it, the very attempt to insert articles ljike this has the purpose of promotion, and however important . it may be to promote scientific careers for you people, that is not the role of WP. DGG ( talk ) 07:33, 10 July 2018 (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.