Jump to content

User:Ruud Koot/Feed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AA: Computer science

[edit]

Articles for deletion

Proposed deletions

Redirects for discussion

(2 more...)

Good article nominees

Articles to be merged

Articles to be split

Articles for creation

(23 more...)

AA: Computing

[edit]
Shortcut

Did you know

Articles for deletion

(16 more...)

Proposed deletions

(1 more...)

Categories for discussion

Templates for discussion

Redirects for discussion

(1 more...)

Good article nominees

Featured article reviews

Requested moves

Articles to be merged

(34 more...)

Articles to be split

(17 more...)

Articles for creation

(50 more...)

AfD: Computing

[edit]

Computing

[edit]

Bounce Back Technologies

[edit]
Bounce Back Technologies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unremarkable IT consultancy, fails WP:CORP, no significant coverage from reliable sources found in a WP:BEFORE search. Referenced only by a press release posted to two websites. Borderline speedy WP:A7. Wikishovel (talk) 13:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, and United Arab Emirates. Wikishovel (talk) 13:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete: "offers technology solutions " is so vague, pretty much any product could be described that way - there doesn't appear to be anything to say about this company. Only given sources are press releases. -- D'n'B-t -- 14:15, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Easy Programming Language

[edit]
Easy Programming Language (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable programming language. The only sources are the language's official website, and I found no online sources in English or Chinese that establish notability. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 12:33, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Delete, does not help that searching for easy programming language just brings up a list of languages that are "easy"
but yeah, google scholar search[1] also seems to indicate little to no interest in the language. The current article attracts little attention and is mostly a manual for hello world. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 00:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
It appears chinese in origin. If an editor with experience in chinese programming language could help provide info, that would be nice.
There are some sourcing in the chinese wikipedia [2], but they suffer same problem as what nom suggests Bluethricecreamman (talk) 00:42, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
  • delete since sourcing from zhwiki article does not use reliable sourcing, and barely any sources online. ToadetteEdit! 17:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Problem management

[edit]
Problem management (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails general notability guideline. ltbdl (talk) 16:42, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete Self-explanatory term, and the cited sources talk about much more specific concepts that could fall under the umbrella of problem management in IT. Searching for more general, relevant information is hopeless. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 00:05, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Computing. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Cleanup stack

[edit]
Cleanup stack (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This does not appear to meet WP:ORG / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 18:52, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom -1ctinus📝🗨 19:39, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Symbian per nom. How the heck did this nothing of an article make it fourteen years without anyone noticing it? jp×g🗯️ 11:48, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Version Control by Example

[edit]
Version Control by Example (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Found this while looking through orphans. A WP:BEFORE Fails to come up with any reviews or charts besides programming blogs. Even reviews linked on the author's website lacks anything for WP:NBOOK. -1ctinus📝🗨 14:46, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

GUSE

[edit]
GUSE (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article lacks of WP:GNG, since it is a project of cloud infrastructure with little overall impact. It seems there are a few other project-related articles that are related to the Institute for Computer Science and Control (SZTAKI) of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences that seem to lack considerably WP:GNG as well. Recently, other related articles have been already deleted: [3], and [4]. Chiserc (talk) 07:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

P-GRADE Portal

[edit]
P-GRADE Portal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article lacks of WP:GNG, since it is a project of cloud infrastructure in grid computing with little overall impact and very few available sources, mostly self-published sources of the authors of this project. It seems there are a few other project-related articles that are related to the Institute for Computer Science and Control (SZTAKI) of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences that seem to lack considerably WP:GNG as well. Recently, other related articles have been already deleted: [5] and [6]. The targetted articles, like this nomination, GUSE, and the deleted article of MTA SZTAKI Laboratory of Parallel and Distributed Systems, were all created by the same user many years ago. Chiserc (talk) 07:49, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Athanasios Tsakalidis

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Athanasios Tsakalidis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article reads as a resume, or a professor bio than that of an encyclopedic article. I really question WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV as there just aren't very many sources coming up for him. I am also rather leery that 70% of the 10 references currently existing on the page are of works he (co)wrote. I see that there was a split decision on the AFD back in 2006 for this page, and the page does not seem to have improved in quality since then. Longer, yes, but quality... hmm. We seem to still be in the same state of, and I'll quote Melaen from that AFD here, "Looks very unpolished, could be cleaned up extensively. Seems NN, but I could be wrong.". I'm all for keeping articles of scientists, but basic criteria such as GNG must be met, and I'm just not seeing potential at this time. Opening up this discussion in the hopes I am wrong, and IF notability could be met, to shine some light on a page that needs a real overhaul. Currently though my vote is Delete. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Science, Computing, and Greece. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 23:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
  • delete There is no notability. I've looked at the Greek-language sources and there's nothing beyond the trivial there either. An academic like millions of others. D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment? Millions? How did you arrive at that figure? Nom seems to be unaware that WP:Prof may also be met. Subject has high GS citations, but in a very high cited field. Not sure. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:56, 26 July 2024 (UTC).
    When I say there are millions of other academics, I mean that there's nothing special about his career that makes it stand out. If you could take a moment to clarify your position, it would be much appreciated. Now you're disrupting the consensus process just to disrupt it. D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
It would be helpful to other editors if you were more precise in your use of language so that there is no need for further explanation. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC).
  • Week keep There's a decent case for a WP:PROF#C1 by way of a sufficiently strong citation profile. (Computer science is a comparatively high-citation field, but a fair amount of his publication record is from decades ago, meaning that it dates to an era when citation rates were lower overall and it has had more time to be indirectly influential.) However, there doesn't seem to be much to say. After a round of cleanup, the article doesn't besmirch the dignity of the encyclopedia with egregious promotionalism, but it doesn't appear that removing the article would leave a critical gap in our coverage of computer science. Overall, keeping it seems justifiable but not obligatory. XOR'easter (talk) 19:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep as above. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:33, 26 July 2024 (UTC).
  • Weak delete. The only case seems to be WP:PROF#C1 and the closer one looks the less impressive the record seems to be. His early work was in data structures (one of my primary areas of research); among his higher-cited publications he has coauthorship on a textbook by the much more notable Kurt Mehlhorn and one paper on the order-maintenance problem which is neither the first word on the subject (see Dietz STOC 1982) nor the last. It's hard to see much pattern in his more recent works except for a series of papers on using machine learning techniques in recruitment; compared to data structures, machine learning is a much higher citation subfield and his citation numbers in this area are ok but nothing special. He doesn't appear to have published at all since 2021. And although I suspect that the basic career milestones in the article could be sourced, almost none of it actually is adequately sourced. XOR'easter already removed a large chunk of "puffery, glurge, and inline external URLs" and I removed more, but it would need to be stubbed down much more if kept. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete, per David Eppstein. For machine learning, I would expect higher citation numbers for satisfying WP:PROF#C1, and there does not appear to be evidence of passing WP:PROF on any other grounds. Nsk92 (talk) 14:44, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Genie (programming language)

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Genie (programming language) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was deleted via AfD in 2009 but then recreated. Survived an AfD in 2019 which was quickly closed as a revenge nomination, without discussion. Sources do not provide sufficient coverage and/or are not reliable. Just another non-notable programming language (dialect). IntGrah (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Delete: I found some sources that describe unrelated programming projects/proposals that contain the word "Genie", but nothing beyond that. This subject is not notable. HyperAccelerated (talk) 20:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:41, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Pure (programming language)

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Pure (programming language) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP: N. There are some AfDs in the past that mostly made arguments that weren't based on Wikipedia policy (plus some off-site canvassing). There is a short article in iX about the language, but this alone isn't enough to meet notability guidelines. If voting Keep, please provide sources that are reliable and substantially more than a few sentences about the language -- there needs to be enough to write an actual article. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. A lot of the previous AfD arguments were based on non-arguments such as "under active development", "unique language", and "not an orphan". IntGrah (talk) 18:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep. Well, one of the previous AfD arguments mentioned a refereed article from the Linux Audio Conference 2009 proceedings, this ACM paper, and Michael Riepe. Rein ins Vergnügen : Pure – eine einfache funktionale Sprache. iX 12/2009, p. 147. ( http://www.heise.de/ix/artikel/Rein-ins-Vergnuegen-856225.html ). This seems like three decent sources to me. No? jp×g🗯️ 12:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:55, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Join Java

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Join Java (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP: N. I can't find any additional sources that would establish notability (i.e. that aren't written by the designer of the programming language). HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Comment: The previous AfD gives some sources that could be used, but they're mostly brief descriptions in papers/presentations. There's one source that writes about two paragraphs about the language, but the paper is so awfully written (obvious formatting errors and the actual content about Join Java is copy-pasted from the Wikipedia article itself) that I wouldn't be very comfortable writing an entire article around it. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Delete The sources given in the previous AfD do not provide substantial coverage. IntGrah (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 15:31, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Kindergarden (demoparty)

[edit]
Kindergarden (demoparty) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. There is a Digi.no article, but it consists of telling what one of the organizers said. Other than that, I was only able to find mentions and short descriptions, such as "The two pure demo parties in Norway are Solskogen, which is organised in July every year, and Kindergarden, which is held in November. Kindergarden can boast that it is the world's oldest demo party that is still organised."

A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Redirect: All the sources are self-published or that Digi.no article which is pretty much just an event announcement. Could not find anything on google for it either. Probably sufficient to put "Amiga-focused demoparty which began in a kindergarden in YEAR and ended in YEAR, reaching 200 attendees in YEAR". Mrfoogles (talk) 15:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
i.e. just write what is possible based off those sources and maybe their website Mrfoogles (talk) 15:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

AfD: Science

[edit]
Shortcuts


Science

[edit]

Athanasios Tsakalidis

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Athanasios Tsakalidis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article reads as a resume, or a professor bio than that of an encyclopedic article. I really question WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV as there just aren't very many sources coming up for him. I am also rather leery that 70% of the 10 references currently existing on the page are of works he (co)wrote. I see that there was a split decision on the AFD back in 2006 for this page, and the page does not seem to have improved in quality since then. Longer, yes, but quality... hmm. We seem to still be in the same state of, and I'll quote Melaen from that AFD here, "Looks very unpolished, could be cleaned up extensively. Seems NN, but I could be wrong.". I'm all for keeping articles of scientists, but basic criteria such as GNG must be met, and I'm just not seeing potential at this time. Opening up this discussion in the hopes I am wrong, and IF notability could be met, to shine some light on a page that needs a real overhaul. Currently though my vote is Delete. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Science, Computing, and Greece. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 23:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
  • delete There is no notability. I've looked at the Greek-language sources and there's nothing beyond the trivial there either. An academic like millions of others. D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment? Millions? How did you arrive at that figure? Nom seems to be unaware that WP:Prof may also be met. Subject has high GS citations, but in a very high cited field. Not sure. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:56, 26 July 2024 (UTC).
    When I say there are millions of other academics, I mean that there's nothing special about his career that makes it stand out. If you could take a moment to clarify your position, it would be much appreciated. Now you're disrupting the consensus process just to disrupt it. D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
It would be helpful to other editors if you were more precise in your use of language so that there is no need for further explanation. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC).
  • Week keep There's a decent case for a WP:PROF#C1 by way of a sufficiently strong citation profile. (Computer science is a comparatively high-citation field, but a fair amount of his publication record is from decades ago, meaning that it dates to an era when citation rates were lower overall and it has had more time to be indirectly influential.) However, there doesn't seem to be much to say. After a round of cleanup, the article doesn't besmirch the dignity of the encyclopedia with egregious promotionalism, but it doesn't appear that removing the article would leave a critical gap in our coverage of computer science. Overall, keeping it seems justifiable but not obligatory. XOR'easter (talk) 19:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep as above. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:33, 26 July 2024 (UTC).
  • Weak delete. The only case seems to be WP:PROF#C1 and the closer one looks the less impressive the record seems to be. His early work was in data structures (one of my primary areas of research); among his higher-cited publications he has coauthorship on a textbook by the much more notable Kurt Mehlhorn and one paper on the order-maintenance problem which is neither the first word on the subject (see Dietz STOC 1982) nor the last. It's hard to see much pattern in his more recent works except for a series of papers on using machine learning techniques in recruitment; compared to data structures, machine learning is a much higher citation subfield and his citation numbers in this area are ok but nothing special. He doesn't appear to have published at all since 2021. And although I suspect that the basic career milestones in the article could be sourced, almost none of it actually is adequately sourced. XOR'easter already removed a large chunk of "puffery, glurge, and inline external URLs" and I removed more, but it would need to be stubbed down much more if kept. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete, per David Eppstein. For machine learning, I would expect higher citation numbers for satisfying WP:PROF#C1, and there does not appear to be evidence of passing WP:PROF on any other grounds. Nsk92 (talk) 14:44, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Society of Physicists of Macedonia

[edit]
Society of Physicists of Macedonia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I found no notability per WP:ORG. SL93 (talk) 22:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and North Macedonia. SL93 (talk) 22:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:05, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep 75 y.o. professional organizations. Sources are likely in Macedonian (using Cyrillic alphabet) and Greek (using Greek alphabet), so not surprising that they can't be found in a summary google search. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:36, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep for same reason as above. Searching on the Cyrillic I find some pages, although I am relying on Chrome translate. It does seem to be an established organization that has been around for a significant time, no reason to delete. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
I disagree that there is automatically no reason to delete because sources might exist. On top of that, the year of establishment is currently unverified which is a core Wikipedia policy. SL93 (talk) 19:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
N.B., I did find sources, it was not "might". Ldm1954 (talk) 22:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Means the same thing to me as you haven't shared them. I see this being a keep so I guess it doesn't matter.. SL93 (talk) 22:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion around the coverage provided to this organization by known existing sources would be helpful in attaining a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:15, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Comment, as more discussion was requested. Being specific here (Google search on the cyrillic) turns up a decent number of hits. However, I cannot trust the Google translate enough. What we need is someone who does, for instance (doing a ping) EdwardKaravakis who may know others. I am posting to a Macedonian project noticeboard as well. Ldm1954 (talk) 02:06, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
hm I do not know Cyrillic, never heard of this society before and I am pretty sure that this should be of Northern Macedonia instead.. EdwardKaravakis (talk) 03:34, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Science Proposed deletions

[edit]

Science Miscellany for deletion

[edit]

Science Redirects for discussion

[edit]
This section is transcluded from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 30. (edit | history)
Disambiguate Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Disambiguate


Deletion Review

[edit]

AfD: Academics

[edit]

Academics and educators

[edit]

Richardt Strydom

[edit]
Richardt Strydom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:PHOTOGRAPHER. Looks like a lot of sources but sources 9-22 are primary sources merely confirming exhibition. LibStar (talk) 00:28, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Shipra Guha-Mukherjee

[edit]
Shipra Guha-Mukherjee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability and significance issues Thewikizoomer (talk) 17:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Bassem Fleifel

[edit]
Bassem Fleifel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPROF, fails WP:BIO 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:05, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Lebanon. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:05, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nothing found that would support a pass of WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR. But there may be a language barrier in play, as most of what little is listed on his Google Scholar profile appears to be in Arabic [8], so if multiple reliably-published reviews of multiple books can be found (regardless of language) I could be persuaded to change my mind. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:29, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Chuck Garcia

[edit]
Chuck Garcia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional page for non-notable engineer and public speaker. I couldn't find any reliable sources via Google News or Newsbank Database (wider and deeper than Google). Fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:NPROF, WP:AUTHOR. Cabrils (talk) 00:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Businesspeople, Radio, Engineering, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:27, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. Notability not apparent yet. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. The only thing in the article that looks like it could plausibly lead to notability is authorship of two books, The Moment That Defines Your Life and A Climb to the Top. But my searches of the web, news, and scholarly sources failed to find any reliably published reviews of either book, so I don't think he passes WP:AUTHOR. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:43, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete for failing to meet any relevant notability standard and reeking of promotionalism. The second book was published through "Advantage Media Group", which ticks a lot of boxes for being a vanity press, starting with a "book publishing services" website full of "synergize your brand potentialities" language that makes me want to gouge out my eyes with a rusty spoon. Even a self-published book could contribute to notability if it were reliably reviewed, of course, but that is not the case here. Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. XOR'easter (talk) 22:19, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete fails WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete Per everything that’s been said above. No indication of notability. Go4thProsper (talk) 22:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Iyke Nathan Uzorma

[edit]
Iyke Nathan Uzorma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

If all of the unsourced claims of supernatural abilities were removed from this article, I'm not sure what would be left. Until recently, this was a redirect to a book but has become the focus of a single purpose editor. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 21:44, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Biographical Information and Publications: Key details about his early life that are supported by verifiable sources such as books can be found online from Google Books. Geswith (talk) 23:19, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Biographical Information and Publications: Key details about his early life that are supported by verifiable sources such as books can be found online from Google Books and credible news from Nigeria such as Punch newspapers. Geswith (talk) 23:22, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete - A WP:BEFORE search does not reveal significant coverage in reliable sources. The current sourcing of the article is not enough to meet notability criteria for WP:GNG, WP:NACADEMIC, nor WP:NAUTHOR. The three book citations were all written by him, and about him and are self-published by Xlibris Corporation, not a reliable publisher. One source is a wikipedia mirror wiki (user submitted content) and the "All Christian Quotes" website is also user-submitted content. There is one possible reliable source (Punch) but that is not enough to pass WP standards for notability. The article is WP:PROMO and largely unsourced, it may contain original research or possibly be a COI creation. Netherzone (talk) 23:36, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete: Completely fails WP:NAUTHOR and WP:BASIC. Haven't found a single independent source about him. A7 may apply here because I do not see a credible claim of significance. C F A 💬 23:52, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
    these are independent sources.
    kindly check this one:
    • Okeke, Chukwuemeka. (2018). Spiritual Leaders of Modern Africa. African Scholars Press. ISBN 978-978-12345-6-7.
      • Offers insights into the lives and influences of contemporary African spiritual leaders, including Iyke Nathan Uzorma. [Reference to specific pages: p. 102-110 for discussion on Uzorma’s influence.]
    • Nwankwo, Stella. (2021). The Role of Charitable Works in Modern Christianity. Faith and Hope Publications. ISBN 978-987-65432-1-0.
      • Discusses Uzorma’s philanthropic efforts through Mercy Store House. [Reference to specific pages: p. 78-85 for information on his charity work.]
    • Johnson, Elizabeth. (2019). Biographical Profiles of Notable Nigerian Figures. Lagos Publishing House. ISBN 978-978-43210-9-8.
      • Contains a biographical profile of Iyke Nathan Uzorma, including his early life and career. [Reference to specific pages: p. 56-65 for detailed biography.]
    • Adeyemi, Solomon. (2022). Religious Transformations in Nigeria. West African Press. ISBN 978-978-87654-3-2.
      • Examines religious figures and transformations in Nigeria, including Uzorma’s role in the broader context. [Reference to specific pages: p. 90-100 for context on Uzorma’s religious journey.]
    Geswith (talk) 23:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
    @Geswith: How do you know of Iyke Nathan Uzorma? C F A 💬 23:54, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
    i have been researching him for a long time. most of his claims have been substantiated by people all over the world. Geswith (talk) 23:58, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
    @Geswith, it seems from the portrait of him in the article - your "own work", that you do have some connection to him deeper than just researching him. Please explain. Netherzone (talk) 02:27, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
    @Geswith, I can't find any of those books in an online search. I tried searching by title, and by author and by ISBN number but came up cold. Could you please provide links so that they can be verified. Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 01:50, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
    @Netherzone: I don't think these are real books. Look at the ISBNs: "978-978-12345-6-7", "978-987-65432-1-0", "978-978-87654-3-2", "978-978-43210-9-8". I also can't find anything about their publishers. They look like hallucinations by ChatGPT or something similar. C F A 💬 01:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
    I agree, @CFA, I could not find any of these publishing houses either. Do you think this is a hoax article or just a lot of AI hallucinations? Netherzone (talk) 01:58, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
    Well, the person seems to exist, but I have no clue if the information is accurate or not because there are no references aside from the "books" above. I imagine the creator has some sort of conflict of interest and most of it is original research. Regardless, it is safe to say they are not notable. C F A 💬 02:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
    You mean you can't confirm his "encounters with what he describes as advanced extraterrestrial intelligences or angelic beings of light"? Counterfeit Purses (talk) 02:24, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
    sorry for the late response. i will definitely get you the proof you require. Geswith (talk) 05:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete, obviously or per WP:V if I have to provide a rationale. I found this AfD through the academic deletion sorting list so I was curious how in particular he qualified as an academic. I find it interesting that the supposed "St Thomas-a-Becket University, Canterbury, England" that our article claims him to be a professor of has greater evidence of existing in Nigeria than in England. But I suppose that's far from the sketchiest part of this story. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:18, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete - clear COI here and serious lack of notability. The two universities that he is supposedly associated with don't seem to exist outside of self-published sources about Uzorma himself. There is nothing here to justify a Wikipedia article. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not enough WP:SIGCOV from reliable sources to meet WP:GNG. The article is presently undergoing editing, only 1 source remains as of this time, punchng.com, which may be the only source that may have some claim to reliability. Prof.PMarini (talk) 10:27, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
    Punch is listed as generally reliable in Wikipedia:WikiProject Nigeria/Nigerian sources but the article is essentially a long extended quote from the subject; it has no depth of coverage about the subject. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:33, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Claudio Fernando de Aguiar

[edit]
Claudio Fernando de Aguiar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Promotional also. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 12:36, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Athanasios Tsakalidis

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Athanasios Tsakalidis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article reads as a resume, or a professor bio than that of an encyclopedic article. I really question WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV as there just aren't very many sources coming up for him. I am also rather leery that 70% of the 10 references currently existing on the page are of works he (co)wrote. I see that there was a split decision on the AFD back in 2006 for this page, and the page does not seem to have improved in quality since then. Longer, yes, but quality... hmm. We seem to still be in the same state of, and I'll quote Melaen from that AFD here, "Looks very unpolished, could be cleaned up extensively. Seems NN, but I could be wrong.". I'm all for keeping articles of scientists, but basic criteria such as GNG must be met, and I'm just not seeing potential at this time. Opening up this discussion in the hopes I am wrong, and IF notability could be met, to shine some light on a page that needs a real overhaul. Currently though my vote is Delete. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Science, Computing, and Greece. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 23:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
  • delete There is no notability. I've looked at the Greek-language sources and there's nothing beyond the trivial there either. An academic like millions of others. D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment? Millions? How did you arrive at that figure? Nom seems to be unaware that WP:Prof may also be met. Subject has high GS citations, but in a very high cited field. Not sure. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:56, 26 July 2024 (UTC).
    When I say there are millions of other academics, I mean that there's nothing special about his career that makes it stand out. If you could take a moment to clarify your position, it would be much appreciated. Now you're disrupting the consensus process just to disrupt it. D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
It would be helpful to other editors if you were more precise in your use of language so that there is no need for further explanation. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC).
  • Week keep There's a decent case for a WP:PROF#C1 by way of a sufficiently strong citation profile. (Computer science is a comparatively high-citation field, but a fair amount of his publication record is from decades ago, meaning that it dates to an era when citation rates were lower overall and it has had more time to be indirectly influential.) However, there doesn't seem to be much to say. After a round of cleanup, the article doesn't besmirch the dignity of the encyclopedia with egregious promotionalism, but it doesn't appear that removing the article would leave a critical gap in our coverage of computer science. Overall, keeping it seems justifiable but not obligatory. XOR'easter (talk) 19:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep as above. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:33, 26 July 2024 (UTC).
  • Weak delete. The only case seems to be WP:PROF#C1 and the closer one looks the less impressive the record seems to be. His early work was in data structures (one of my primary areas of research); among his higher-cited publications he has coauthorship on a textbook by the much more notable Kurt Mehlhorn and one paper on the order-maintenance problem which is neither the first word on the subject (see Dietz STOC 1982) nor the last. It's hard to see much pattern in his more recent works except for a series of papers on using machine learning techniques in recruitment; compared to data structures, machine learning is a much higher citation subfield and his citation numbers in this area are ok but nothing special. He doesn't appear to have published at all since 2021. And although I suspect that the basic career milestones in the article could be sourced, almost none of it actually is adequately sourced. XOR'easter already removed a large chunk of "puffery, glurge, and inline external URLs" and I removed more, but it would need to be stubbed down much more if kept. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete, per David Eppstein. For machine learning, I would expect higher citation numbers for satisfying WP:PROF#C1, and there does not appear to be evidence of passing WP:PROF on any other grounds. Nsk92 (talk) 14:44, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Pavlos Savvidis

[edit]
Pavlos Savvidis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Academic with a decent publication record (h-factors 43) but no significant awards to verify peer recognition, and no significant coverage beyond a mention back in 2008. Tagged for notability in NPP; no action taken beyond an unexplained and unwarranted removal of notability tag. Does not pass any section of WP:NPROF, and there is no evidence that any other notabilities apply. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:01, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:01, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Armenia and Greece. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep. Another scientist with high GS citations in a high-cited field. Passes WP:Prof#C1. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:49, 26 July 2024 (UTC).
    @Xxanthippe, an 43 h-factor, 7726 total cites and 459 total in 2023 is definitely not high, particularly for a highly cited field, not close to passing WP:NPROF#C1. He has one highly cited paper from his PhD thesis, but not much else. In terms of his GS area of Condensed Matter Physics he comes in something like number 300 or lower. If he had been elected as an APS Fellow it would be different, but there is no such evidence of peer recognition. Ldm1954 (talk) 04:14, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. My vote is unchanged. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:22, 26 July 2024 (UTC).
  • Keep. I'm a little baffled by this afd, given the expert credentials of the nom. In Web-of-science, Savvidis shows >100 papers, ~2600 citations, and H=35 (goes to PROF 1). While it's true that semiconductors (one area of research) is a high citation field, what I find here is the usual gigantic variance in research metrics of WP BLPs working in this field. There are folks both much high and much lower, for example Herbert Kroemer (~700 papers, ~23,000 cites, H 90) and Janice Hudgings (31 papers, ~500 cites, H 11), as well as lots of BLPs having similar stats, like Cyril Hilsum (96 papers, ~1700 cites, H 20). On balance, I have the distinct impression that Savvidis has a research impact appreciably higher than the average professor in this field, suggesting PROF 1 is satisfied. 128.252.210.3 (talk) 17:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
    Hudgings is a pass of PROF#C3 (Optica Fellow) and C5 (named professorship at a high-ranking university). Her case for C1 is more borderline. For Savvidis, though, it seems C1 is the only suitable criterion. So their cases are not really comparable. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
    I agree with @David Eppstein. Just on citations Janice Hudgings would not pass, but her awards indicate major peer recognition so she sails through on WP:NPROF#3. Similarly Cyril Hilsum is NAE plus a stack of other major peer recognition awards, WP:NPROF#3 and perhaps also WP:NPROF#1b and WP:NPROF#2. For Pavlos Savvidis there is no peer recognition, and when I searched a little I also found nothing to mitigate the modest citations. You can look here for a comparison of him to others, which puts him as 57th in Crete. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Very weak keep. I think the citation record is strong enough but I'm having trouble verifying anything else to say about him that is not just a repetition of his potted biography on his own personal web sites. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:19, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Ronald S. Mangum

[edit]
Ronald S. Mangum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The main notability claim here that I see is signing the open letter about Biden's health but his role isn't that large in that event WP:ONEEVENT

Everything else is fairly run-of-the-mill

Then of course there is the admitted CoI editing and page creation. D1551D3N7 (talk) 23:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Elsie M. Frost

[edit]
Elsie M. Frost (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails to pass the general notability guidelines. Zero coverage online beyond a couple of related obituaries. Article is mostly cited to her husband's book. Sgubaldo (talk) 11:17, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Women. Sgubaldo (talk) 11:17, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete Zero evidence of notability. Given the article creator's tendency for posting AI-produced garbage I don't think a closer examination is necessary. Note that in such cases you can make a WP:BUNDLE nomination. Tercer (talk) 12:17, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable. Athel cb (talk) 13:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. This appears to be the standard story of that time of a woman who became a schoolteacher, got married, and then vanished from the public record. I can't read the supposedly archived newspaper.com links, but [1] and [9] appear to be about her husband, [2] is a paid family death notice, [3-8] are neither independent nor reliably published, and [10] appears to be a brief marriage announcement. That is far from enough for GNG, the only relevant notability guideline. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:59, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete nothing to indicate that this subject is notable. The strongest ref is a likely non-notable book written by her husband. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:22, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Khaldoun H. Shami

[edit]
Khaldoun H. Shami (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Is this person notable? Google News yields no hits, and a lot of the references here are completely inappropriate, e.g. his employer's own website, LinkedIn profile, and Google Scholar profile. Uhooep (talk) 16:38, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Alquds, Newspaper. https://www.alquds.co.uk/هذه-خصوصيتي-متضامن-مع-د-رولا-قوّاس/. Retrieved 27 July 2024. {{cite news}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  2. ^ Norwich, UEA. UEA https://www.uea.ac.uk/search/people/?query="film television and media". Retrieved 27 July 2024. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  3. ^ Aljazeera, SJForum. https://sjforum.aljazeera.net/#speakers. Retrieved 27 July 2024. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  4. ^ News, Raseef22. https://raseef22.net/author/169749-خلدون-شامي. Retrieved 27 July 2024. {{cite news}}: |last1= has generic name (help); Missing or empty |title= (help)CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  • Delete Does not appear notable by the standard for academics or that for filmmakers. XOR'easter (talk) 21:52, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep -- the article may require some improvement /missing personal information/ but it meets Wiki's standards -- Google identifies the individual as a public figure - https://g.co/kgs/rmPh8Ed. and It yields results in one more language as well -- he is notable - Keep. Sarah @SarahFossil SarahFossil (talk) 12:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC) — SarahFossil (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
    No, those are not our standards. And no, the name of this website is not "Wiki". XOR'easter (talk) 18:56, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. Looks far WP:TOOSOON for WP:NPROF notability for this 2022 PhD. WP:NCREATIVE for the films is somewhat plausible, but this would require reviews of the work in reliable sources, which are not apparent. Watchlisting in case reviews are found. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 23:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete: I don't see that he meets the notability criteria for academics or filmmakers.--فيصل (talk) 02:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Janet Frost

[edit]
Janet Frost (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails to pass the notability guidelines for academics. While the article says that she was a 'Distinguished Professor', none of the sources nor the Capital Community College website match that. Sgubaldo (talk) 11:13, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete: All sources are either published by the subject or close relatives. A cursory google search did not turn up more either. JackTheSecond (talk) 12:26, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. A few minutes ago I indicated in the discussion of two dissertations why I didn't think she was notable enough for an article. Athel cb (talk) 13:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. I don't think distinguished professor at a community college should count for WP:PROF#C5 and we have no documentation of that title, nor evidence of any other form of notability. Searching Google Scholar for her publications found nothing of note, instead mostly finding publications by some five other people named Janet Frost (themselves not cited heavily enough for WP:PROF). —David Eppstein (talk) 17:50, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Connecticut, New York, and Ohio. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
  • 'Delete per above at this point, tbdesu. jp×g🗯️ 16:30, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete I could not substantiate the "Distinguished Professor" title, or indeed find any evidence that the college in question even awards that title. That claim may well have been "AI" bullshitting. None of the other WP:PROF criteria appear to be met, either. XOR'easter (talk) 22:02, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete per the sentiments of everyone above. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Frank A. Barnhart

[edit]
Frank A. Barnhart (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't find any other sources besides the self-published theatre link. Does not meet notability criteria. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 21:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Agreed, it's not clear (from the article) that the subject is notable according to WP:CREATIVE. If he is, then work needs doing to the article to demonstrate that notability. (Given the article has been tagged with Template:Notability and Template:BLP sources for over 10 years and has not really been edited since then, it feels unlikely that work will be done.) — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 14:42, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Proposed deletions

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ruud_Koot/Feed&oldid=807663388"