Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Anil Kumar


 * 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. Favonian (talk) 08:53, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Dr. Anil Kumar

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't seem to meet WP:PROF. Improvement tags and then prod removed by creator (a WP:SPA whose username indicates a possible WP:COI). Boleyn (talk) 08:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:05, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:05, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:05, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails the notability for an academic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:26, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. C ute st Penguin '''  {talk • contribs} 18:05, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Evidence of notability not yet sufficient. Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:31, 27 July 2014 (UTC).
 * even this article fails WP:PROF. C ute st Penguin '''  {talk • contribs} 14:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - horrid sourcing. The subject doesn't pass any part of the "Prof test".  It's not the quantity of patents one has gained (secured often as a tax write-off for an employer), but the quality of inventions that matter, for notability. Bearian (talk) 17:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Anil Kumar's academic work is widely known in academia. At least 30 more links can be found if one searches well. Technology (BOD biosensor) developed by him and his team in the market which is patented and protected by his patents.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.54.226.249 (talk) 12:45, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * These are primary sources, not the secondary sources that are needed for notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:47, 30 July 2014 (UTC).


 * Keep Please visit http://scholar.google.co.in/citations?user=8aPHDacAAAAJ&hl=en which is the platform of all secondary sources of his notability. One has to understand that notability in academics and other areas is quite different and can't be measured by same parameters  Academic work of Anil Kumar has received 282 citations so far from other researchers/scientists which account to 10 h-index to his credit.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anilcbt (talk • contribs) 06:04, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Citation counts (per the Google scholar link provided by Anilcbt – thanks!) are too low to make a case for WP:PROF and no other sign of notability is evident. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:30, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Response and keep what about his prolific inventorship in number of US and European patents, forget other patents in India or other countries. You can find him in databases like USPTO and EPO. He is inventor in 10 granted US patents (please note 'granted' not filed) which is very rare at the age of 39. Can anyone tell the name of some other inventor who credits 10 granted US patents below the age of 40 in current times in India or abroad? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.61.227 (talk) 06:42, 31 July 2014 (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.