Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yavuz Nutku

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. JForget 00:25, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yavuz Nutku

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

Article does not establish notability. No endowed professorships or awards mentioned, and his "selected papers" don't seem especially noteworthy BeIsKr (talk) 01:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I did the work of actually checking. Scopus shows 55 papers, most of them in very good international journals. The citations for the highest are 49, 32, 31. This is not a Nobe;l-prize winning record, but considering the number of papers, it is enough for notability DGG ( talk ) 03:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. More than just journal papers are needed, ideally we need non-trivial coverage of this individual from multiple third party publications demonstrating notability. JBsupreme (talk) 06:09, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't think this kind of citation record, for a theoretical physicist after a 40-year career, is anything to write home about, and I don't see anything else that would convince me that he passes WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete. GS, as seen above, gives from its wider coverage rather larger cites of 69, 60, 44, 35, 9, 9... with h index = 7. Such cites are non-trivial coverage of this individual from multiple third party publications but in this case are not sufficent to ensure notability. This usually requires many hundreds of cites. Xxanthippe (talk) 09:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Delete per David Eppstein. Ray^Talk 05:34, 6 November 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.