Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aleksandar Jurišić


 * 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. Fails to meet WP:PROF. Given this is a BLP, this deletion not preclude the possibility of this article being recreated in future should the individual meet any of the requirements of that guideline. Seddon talk 08:24, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Aleksandar Jurišić

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I couldn't establish that he meets WP:PROF or WP:GNG, but I may be missing something. This has been in CAT:NN for 12 years, so hopefully we can resolve it now. Boleyn (talk) 08:05, 30 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. Article is a stub, but a simple Google search reveals he meets criteria - currently he is a Full Prof., head of a lab, member of editorial board for Ars mathematica contemporanea, has impact outside academia (works with Def Min),... Regards, Klemen Kocjancic (talk) 08:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep I think when the NN tag was placed in 2009 he was certainly non-notable, but now he is a full professor at a major university in Slovenia. A solid keep.   scope_creep Talk  14:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neither of the above "keep" votes are based on policy: none of being a full professor, being head of a lab, or being a member of an editorial board of a minor journal are valid rationales for keeping an article. (Instead, we have related but stronger criteria: someone at a distinguished professor title, or something like that that is a clear step above full professor, someone who heads an entire university, or someone who is editor-in-chief of a major journal, are notable.) We also do not have the citation record necessary to demonstrate a pass of WP:PROF, and there is no evidence of any other WP:PROF or other notability criterion. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neither the article nor the two votes above make any argument that any of the criteria of WP:NPROF is fulfilled, a search on GS indicates that he likely fails NPROF#1 due  to  low citations. --hroest 15:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not seeing a C1 pass here, but maybe another would have a better gauge of impact... JoelleJay (talk) 18:24, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. Since I was mentioned, I'll say that I'm not seeing much of a hidden case for notability that others have missed.  I agree that full prof, head of a lab, and membership on an editorial board (short of editor in chief) fail the average professor test of WP:NPROF.  He's mentioned in a Delo (newspaper) article  in the context of a successful class contest to decode a WWI-era note.  I'm doubtful that the article is enough upon which to hang notability, however. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 19:22, 1 September 2021 (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.