Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Przemysław Frasunek (2nd nomination)

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. WP:NAC closure by Eduemoni ^↑talk↓ 21:08, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Przemysław Frasunek[edit]

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

Sources present don't seem to me sufficient to warrant this biography passing WP:BIO. Only The Register is mainstream, and discovering few code vulnerabilities, with one mention in a mainstream publication, does not seem to cut it. The pl wiki cited interview in Polish Computerworld doesn't seem sufficient; it's not about him, it's about his views on computer security - being interviewed does not make one notable; this would require showing that his person is discussed in independent sources, which is not the case. And his achievements are not widely reported; IMHO he fails WP:ANYBIO 1 and 2, and all WP:CREATIVE points, as well. The cited, mostly niche sources, plus The Registrar, do not convince me that he made "a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field". CC Previous AfD participants: User:Boleyn, User:Unscintillating, User:DGG. PS. Also cc User:Tqbf who made extensive comments on this article's lack of notability's at the article's talk page. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

question Piotrus , could you explain for us the history of the article on the Polish WP--there appears to have been an earlier AfD there that deleted the article--was it challenged again after being recreate, or what? My argument for keeping at the prior AfD was based on my reluctance to delete an article on a Polish topic accepted in that country's WP, but perhaps there's more to be said about that. DGG ( talk ) 03:29, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- First, in my experience pl wiki notability criteria are much more relaxed, and existing rules are not applied consistently. Anyway, this article was deleted in August 2006 from pl wiki; recreated by original author the following months, and nobody seems to have noticed that. Perhaps it lookes notable for pl wiki, hard to say as the dominant rule there for keeping articles seems to be "because I feel it's notable". Anyway, I did nominate it for deletion there recently ([1]) but nobody else cared to comment and it was closed as keep, despite the fact that nobody cared to object to my arguments (about lack of notability and improper recreation). I complained to the closing admin there and was ignored ([2]). So, let me caution you against the argument that existence of article or positive keep discussion on pl wiki is meaningful. A lot of crap is kept there because "people felt like it". I have also seen snow keeps deleted because an admin decided to enforce a guideline... it's chaos over there. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:35, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - recreated by original author the following months - looking at the history of this article in .pl, this statement is incorrect Jagger11 (talk) 19:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Hmmm, I am not sure who was the original author, so perhaps I am wrong about it. It is clear from pl:Wikipedia:SDU/Przemysław Frasunek-1 that the article was deleted on August 2006 and from [3] that it was recreated in September that year by you (or at least someone using the username Jagger on pl wiki; btw, you should use a single account for all projects). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:25, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete , though open to a possible keep, because this is the sort of occupation which tends not to use normal sources. DGG ( talk ) 17:22, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, Frasunek is mentioned as an co-author of the first exploitation technique in the Uncontrolled format string article, and this fact can be confirmed in several sources [4], [5]. Also, his research is cited in books: [6], as well as in papers [7] available from such domains as www.cs.ucsb.edu (UC Santa Barbara), www.usenix.org (Usenix), diuf.unifr.ch (Uni of Fribourg), www.cs.umd.edu (U. of Maryland) Jagger11 (talk) 17:00, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Being cited a few times is not enough; if it was I'd be notable, too :> I cannot open the first book to verify what is written it it; and the pdf of a presentation, while I'll grant it is reliable (published on .edu), is not an indication of mainstream coverage, as required by GNG, and joins all the other, niche sources in being, well, niche, and not helping with GNG/BIO notability. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:25, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:31, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 21:39, 6 November 2013 (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.