Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexandru Dimca


 * 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. Consensus appears clear and this nomination also seemed to lack WP:BEFORE. Hence, the need for an early closure. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 17:26, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Alexandru Dimca

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There's no particular indication this individual may meet WP:PROF. - Biruitorul Talk 19:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Keep. I'm the creator of the article, and imho Alexandru Dimca meet WP:PROF. Jean-Noël Sapin (talk) 10:31, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * 1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. “The most typical way of satisfying Criterion 1 is to show that the academic has been an author of highly cited academic work – either several extremely highly cited scholarly publications or a substantial number of scholarly publications with significant citation rates.”
 * According to, he has one publication cited 580 times, three publications cited more than 100 times, and 112 publications. His h-index is 24, which is particularly significant.
 * Alexandru Dimca is a distinguished mathematician according to.
 * This source says : Alexandru Dimca, s-a remarcat prin cercetările sale de vârf în domeniul geometriei algebrice. Este astăzi un matematician şi un profesor cu reputaţie internaţională, invitat în mari centre de matematică ale lumii să facă cercetare sau să ţină conferinţe. Publicaţiile sale i-au adus numeroase premii şi burse de cercetare (translation : Alexandru Dimca was noted for his research in algebraic geometry. Today he is a mathematician and a professor of international reputation, invited the world's great centers of mathematical research to make or keep conferences. His publications have brought numerous awards and fellowships).
 * 4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions. “Criterion 4 may be satisfied, for example, if the person has authored several books that are widely used as textbooks (or as a basis for a course) at multiple institutions of higher education.”
 * His books Sheaves in topology and Singularities and topology of hypersurfaces are very highly cited, and usually used in algebraic geometry courses in University (three examples ).


 * Keep. GScholar gives an h-index of 24, which is comfortably above the level we generally accept for mathematicians, particularly in a highly theoretical area like algebraic geometry, as satisfying WP:PROF#C1. While GScholar can sometimes be overgenerous in what it counts as a citation, experience in theses AfD discussions suggests that the most reliable citation counters (to which I do not bave access) are very unlikely to give an h-index low enough (distinctly below 20 in this field) to change my judgement. PWilkinson (talk) 15:25, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:56, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:56, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. The high citation counts for his monographs (and also for the Annals paper "Hypersurface complements, Milnor fibers and higher homotopy groups of arrangments") should be good enough for WP:PROF in a low-citation field. The festschrift also adds support to the case that he has a high profile as a mathematician. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:12, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. I understand Biruitorul's nomination, because what Jean-Noël Sapin has argued well here is not in the article -- would you please add this?  Instead the arguments are mainly based around mathematics competitions as a kid which do not do enough for WP:PROF.  However, the citations, the Festschrift, and the honorary degree are each alone enough for WP:PROF for me. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 20:36, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I added the Olympiad results after the article was already nominated for deletion. I agree they do not add much for notability, but that is not a good reason for keeping them out of the article. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:42, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:Prof for reasons very clearly expressed above. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:50, 6 February 2016 (UTC).
 * Keep Passes WP:Prof for reasons very clearly expressed above. Moreover, this is one of a series of Romanian language WP:PRODs which points out a systemic bias.  A lot of serious Romanian scholarship is not translated into English.  So they are underrepresented in various search engines.  in fact, the change in lettering and names creates a GIGO conundrum for searchers, even though they may be diligent and seemingly thorough.  Finally, this motion fails because of WP:Before.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 21:55, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. There is another Romanian AfD here Alin Suciu . Xxanthippe (talk) 23:02, 6 February 2016 (UTC).
 * Comment. There is another Romanian AfD here Fernando Carcupino. And I've got more.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 02:21, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per Xxanthippe. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 03:26, 7 February 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.