Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Musa Hakan Asyalı

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:53, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Musa Hakan Asyalı[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)

The person doesn't meet with notability guidelines. I also looked for resources in here, but still I don't think that meets notability. Ahmetlii (talk) 10:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ahmetlii (talk) 10:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 11:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 11:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 11:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 11:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete Was created in July 2010 and was tagged for notability in September that year. –Cupper52^Discuss! 11:56, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cupper52 Having the notability tag doesn't mean it should be deleted. ~Styyx ^{Talk? ^-^} 13:12, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~ Keep Four papers cited more than 100 times (325, 163, 161, 153), total citations 1761 [1]. Overall h-index of 21 is low to borderline. Bioinformatics is a high citation field. I found several references to the article subject having served as the first rector of Abdullah Gül University, which appears to be the turkish equivalent of a university president. These were not RS, but they may exist in turkish if someone with the right language background is willing to look. So it is possible this could satisfy criteria #6 of WP:PROF if reliable sources could be found and AGU is considered a major institution. MoneciousTriffid (talk) 14:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Updated from comment to keep based on the additional turkish language sources described in the comment below mine. MoneciousTriffid (talk) 21:47, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I found some reliable sources talking about his projects [2] [3]. Also has been covered by Hürriyet after he resigned from his position as rector/university president of the Abdullah Gül University and by Sabah after it was found out that he had connections with FETÖ. The rest I found were unreliable sources. As MoneciousTriffid pointed out, the subject meets criteria #6 of WP:PROF, thus should be kept. ~Styyx ^{Talk? ^-^} 17:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:PROF#C6 and the weak but positive case for #C1. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:19, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I added the 4 most cited papers. There are 4 papers with over 150 citations. including a comprehensive review and a standard book, all published by major mainstream scientific publishers. This shows him to be an influence in his subject, and meets WP:PROF, This is further shown by his being head of a major university. (Overall h values are meaningless for notability , as here. they do not discriminate between someone with 350, 250, 150, 4 and someone with 8, 5, 4, 4 both individuals would have an h value of 4. One has a notable record, the other is totally unimportant in their subject. That such numbers are given by universities , and cited in WP, shows here shows the misunderstanding of bioinformatics, both in those writing PR and those writing WP. Eugene Garfield , who invented modern citation analysis , warned against this in his work. His warning seems to have had no effect. People who invent valuable tools sometimes see them used for unfortunate purposes. DGG ( talk ) 09:56, 30 December 2020 (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.