Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce A. Hedman


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 07:43, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Bruce A. Hedman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability per WP:PROF/WP:BIO. Very little, if any, coverage in independent RSs, h-index is low (6 according to his Google Scholar page), the IAJS membership doesn't seem to contribute to notability because it looks like anyone can buy one. I couldn't find any evidence he is a member of ARAS. Hence: delete. Everymorning (talk) 23:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 23:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 23:39, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 23:40, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 23:40, 23 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete no indication that he passes the notability guidelines for academics. His role as a local Presbyterian pastor is also not enough to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:00, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neither being pastor of a small church nor his scholarly contributions are enough for notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:37, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete seems like a nice enough guy. Too bad he doesn't meet GNG or any of the other notability guidelines. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:52, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 *  Weak Keep . A bit of notability here and there. GS h-index of 6 nearly enough for WP:Prof in pure mathematics, a Templeton Award, and religious activism for WP:GNG . Xxanthippe (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2017 (UTC).
 * I don't think it's the Templeton Prize, merely a research grant from the John Templeton Foundation (which also gives the prize). I can find no documentation of it other than in a course syllabus by Hedman himself. The archive link used as a reference doesn't mention Hedman. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:48, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, the very low typical citation counts in pure math do not mean that we should start taking very low h-indexes as an indicator of notability. It means that we should consider other indicators instead. His work on clique graphs is very much a niche topic. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:07, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * What is wrong with a niche topic? One would expect fewer citations for such. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:31, 1 March 2017 (UTC).

Ping User:StAnselm Xxanthippe (talk) 05:18, 27 February 2017 (UTC).
 * Delete per David Eppstein - I don't see any area as leading to notability, and I don't think we can argue for it on the basis of the sum total of several non-notable contributions. StAnselm (talk) 05:36, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, career seems to have stalled. Abductive  (reasoning) 04:19, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete no WP:RS. --David Tornheim (talk) 13:48, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - can't find reliable sources. CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   19:39, 2 March 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.