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.
Keep. Clear pass of
WP:Prof#C1 with GS
h-index of 33. Nominator, who has been editing for two months, is advised to study
WP:Prof and carry out
WP:Before before making further nominations in this area.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 02:26, 26 December 2016 (UTC).reply
(
edit conflict) Keep. According to Google Scholar an author of several very highly cited papers, high citations overall and high GS h-index (33) – all amounting to a very convincing case for passing
WP:PROF#C1. @
RileyBugz: some friendly advice: be especially diligent with step 3 of
WP:BEFORE when nominating articles in topics you're not overly familiar with, because these days there's almost always an applicable subject-specific notability guideline in addition to the GNG. –
Joe (
talk) 02:35, 26 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Comment. Sometimes, nominators who have made mistaken AfD nominations, withdraw them to save the time of other editors.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 03:01, 26 December 2016 (UTC).reply
SNOW Keep as the GoogleScholar citations in IEEE is quite enough, no other serious concerns here.
SwisterTwistertalk 04:24, 26 December 2016 (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.
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.
Keep. Clear pass of
WP:Prof#C1 with GS
h-index of 33. Nominator, who has been editing for two months, is advised to study
WP:Prof and carry out
WP:Before before making further nominations in this area.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 02:26, 26 December 2016 (UTC).reply
(
edit conflict) Keep. According to Google Scholar an author of several very highly cited papers, high citations overall and high GS h-index (33) – all amounting to a very convincing case for passing
WP:PROF#C1. @
RileyBugz: some friendly advice: be especially diligent with step 3 of
WP:BEFORE when nominating articles in topics you're not overly familiar with, because these days there's almost always an applicable subject-specific notability guideline in addition to the GNG. –
Joe (
talk) 02:35, 26 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Comment. Sometimes, nominators who have made mistaken AfD nominations, withdraw them to save the time of other editors.
Xxanthippe (
talk) 03:01, 26 December 2016 (UTC).reply
SNOW Keep as the GoogleScholar citations in IEEE is quite enough, no other serious concerns here.
SwisterTwistertalk 04:24, 26 December 2016 (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.