Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boaz Tsaban


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Boaz Tsaban

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Self-written article, lack of secondary sourcing for notability, editor is busy spamming their carpentry around WP too. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:49, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:58, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:58, 8 June 2017 (UTC)


 *  Weak Keep. Not sure this self-written to begin with (by usernames, it is self-edited). I think he probably meets PROF after a google-scholar search (1254 citations, h-index of 21). Article isn't terribly promotional.Icewhiz (talk) 13:12, 8 June 2017 (UTC) struck Weak due to comments below (personally - I'm never quite sure of the appropriate h-index for each field).Icewhiz (talk) 08:50, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Pure mathematics is quite a low-cited field so an h-index of 21 is exceptional. Some people get passed on 10. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:04, 15 June 2017 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:05, 8 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep A notable professor with many publications. After doing a bit of clean up I see no reason to delete.--Geewhiz (talk) 16:46, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Publications adequately cited to pass WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:53, 8 June 2017 (UTC).
 * Keep. Publications adequately cited to pass WP:Prof. MathSciNet currently shows 423 citations . The reference for the Krill Prize has changed; now updated.LowlanderToo (talk) 00:26, 9 June 2017 (UTC) I should have added that I, not Tsaban, prepared the original article: it is not self-written. I have done no joint research with him and met him maybe only a couple of times at conferences. My purpose in starting a page for Tsaban was because of his significant research output.LowlanderToo (talk) 08:43, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Plenty of relevant citations. Earnsthearthrob (talk) 01:40, 15 June 2017 (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.