Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Andreoff Evans


 * 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The result was Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  11:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

David Andreoff Evans

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I couldn't establish that he meets WP:NOTABILITY. He seems to have had some success, but not enough. Boleyn (talk) 10:42, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:24, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:24, 4 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. The society fellowship may be enough for WP:PROF., although it is not a society I have heard of. And his common name makes it very difficult to search for his publications, but I found five with over 100 citations in Google scholar, likely good enough for #C1. They are:
 * 203 for "Conversation as planned behavior"
 * 184 for "Noun-phrase analysis in unrestricted text for information retrieval"
 * 171 for "Toward a medical-concept representation language"
 * 117 for "A statistical approach to automatic OCR error correction in context"
 * 105 for "Coupling niche browsers and affect analysis for an opinion mining application"
 * —David Eppstein (talk) 18:41, 4 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep -- enough hits in Google books to suggest notability: link. Those who specialise in computational linguistics are far and few between, so his role suggests notability: David A. Evans, Professor of Linguistics and Computer Science and Director of the Laboratory for Computational Linguistics (that was back in 1995). K.e.coffman (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Agree on the weak keep. Although the article does need work. W Nowicki (talk) 23:49, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:00, 5 February 2017 (UTC).

Withdraw nomination per consensus above, Boleyn (talk) 05:46, 5 February 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.