Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Shane Gunderson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Courcelles (talk) 21:55, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

David Shane Gunderson[edit]

David Shane Gunderson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tagged for notability since 2012 and I can't verify that the subject meets WP:PROF. He doesn't have a Google Scholar profile but the publications that show up are all mutiple-coauthored and gets below 20 citations Solomon7968 04:08, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Solomon7968 04:09, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Solomon7968 04:09, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, reluctantly. I agree that he does not seem to be notable for his mathematical publications. What he should be notable for is the large and impressive collection of mathematical models that he has built, that (at least when I visited a few years ago) were on display in the lobby of his department's building. But I can't find any evidence that he actually is notable for that; I don't think my and Greg Frederickson's web pages on his models [1] [2] count for much and other than the subject's own page I can't find anything else. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:39, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: as non-notable academic. Quis separabit? 20:32, 13 September 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.