Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Satoshi Nakamura

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:07, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Satoshi Nakamura[edit]

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

Per WP:GNG, WP:NPROF, and WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. This is a resume, and given the creators username, it seems likely that it was created by the person themselves. ― Padenton|✉ 18:07, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:41, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:41, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I can't judge the significance of the prizes listed in the article, but from his Google scholar profile I think he passes WP:PROF#C1. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:33, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not seeing any in-depth coverage to demonstrate notability. The article is therefore nothing more than a resume - and probably autobiographical too. --DAJF (talk) 09:00, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with David Eppstein that PROF C1 is met. As to whether this is WP:TNTable, I'm neutral. --j⚛e decker ^talk 16:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets WP:PROF#C1. Even with the usual caveats his h-index is also plenty high enough to support notability. The article badly needs expanding to include some substantial prose but that is an editorial matter outwith this AFD. Just Chilling (talk) 18:24, 8 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 06:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see a lot of awards (non of which show a wikilink , sigh...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottawahitech (talk • contribs) 03:29, 15 April 2015‎

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.