Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Daniel Engels


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete &middot; Katefan0(scribble) 03:44, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Dr. Daniel Engels
Not a very notable researcher. Article leads like a resume. Delete. &mdash; J I P | Talk 05:10, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete --[[Image:Ottawa flag.png|20px]] Spinboy 05:16, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Uh...are you sure about this? He's got plenty of Google, and his work in the RFID field alone has taken him afar as New Zealand. Not overly notable to the lay person, but certainly very respected in his field. --inks 09:35, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Did a google scholar search for his work, found two articles on the first page (which I think is an indication in itself), the first one being cited 17 times and the other 9. Lets hope google scholar did its job and found the most significant articles he's published, if this is true, then his research is nothing but standard, and not desrving enough (IMHO) of an entry in an encyclpaedia. Going as far as New Zealand is no big deal, know quite a few researchers here in Brisbane who frequent Canada and the UK for their universities (conferences and such). However, if someone can prove me wrong (or if i've just mucked up with the google scholar search somehow) and he is notable (i.e. the article is expanded to reflect this) then I'll change my vote to keep, but for now it's delete alf 10:52, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't forget the textbook chapters he co-authored (somehow Google Scholar found them too), and those have been cited 40+ times each (never thought I'd see a textbook cited in a published paper, but there you go). By your standards, how many publications and/or citations would be required to establish notability? Also, by other measures (eg. Plain old Google), he seems to be a well sought after speaker at computer and RFID-like conferences.--inks 20:00, 28 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete per alf. Dottore So 11:28, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable researcher.--Nicodemus75 18:57, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * No vote, but if he is so impotant to RFID work, why is he not mentioned in the RFID article? Either a) he is not particularly notable in the field, or b), the RFID article is incomplete. Proto t c 15:09, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per alf. Pilatus 17:43, 29 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.