Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdel-badeeh M. Salem (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 delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:49, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Abdel-badeeh M. Salem
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NACADEMICS. Was nominated for deletion in 2008, but reached no consensus. Does not seem to have been influential or notable and has few sources about him, mostly from first party sources. EllsworthSchmittendorf (talk) 02:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. EllsworthSchmittendorf (talk) 03:01, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:57, 6 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Has GS h-index of 13 in a very well-cited field. Too low to make WP:Prof or any other WP:Prof category. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:58, 6 May 2016 (UTC).
 * Delete. I found one reasonably well-cited publication ("An efficient enhanced k-means clustering algorithm", nearly 200 cites) but it's not enough, and his administrative position (dept. chair) is also not high enough to get notability that way. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:22, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as nothing at all for the applicable notability, I myself would've voted Delete at the 1st AfD. SwisterTwister   talk  06:28, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Definitely not notable enough to be on Wikipedia. Should have been Speedy deleted.   Nik ol ai Ho   21:13, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Although I favor deletion, I disagree that this is a good candidate for speedy deletion. The "head of department" claim in the article is enough of a claim of significance to save this from A7, and having survived an earlier AfD is another reason for not deleting this speedily. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:45, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Well the speedy tag has been removed since, so that's done.   Nik ol ai Ho   03:01, 11 May 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.