Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damodaran M. Vasudevan

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: there is a clear consensus here, especially regarding Esquivalience's statistics. (non-admin closure) EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 00:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Damodaran M. Vasudevan[edit]

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

Not a notable figure. Article not sourced with reliable citations. Google search revel no contribution to Indian Science and Technology, whatsoever Educationtemple (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think an award presented by the president of India (the Dr. B. C. Roy Award) is significant enough to cover notability by itself, but he also has well-cited publications (WP:PROF#C1) and is mentioned as a keynote speaker in this newspaper article. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Given the number of colleges he's been principal or dean of. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Yash! ^(Y) 15:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Reasonably notable. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:PROF#C1: Nearly 6000 citations, a h-index of 28, and a g-index of 73 shows that the subject has made significant impact to his field. Esquivalience ^t 23:55, 27 April 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.