Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugen Campu


 * 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. JForget 23:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Eugen Campu

 * Comment-- I see this was closed early without saying why, but I'll take responsibility for calling it a SNOW delete.    DGG ( talk ) 23:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails WP:PROF. Ray Talk 17:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom, poorly-sourced and claims made in the article are not congruent with this. Anyone actually solving the Riemann hypothesis would be assured of worldwide fame, but I can't find any evidence of such. Rodhull  andemu  18:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Searching finds lots of strange pages (I can't post the example I intended because it is blacklisted!), but nothing supporting WP:GNG or WP:PROF. Sadly, not even incorrectly claiming to have solved the Riemann hypothesis is notable (list of 35 failures). Note that the companion Vasiliu Lucilius (mentioned in article) has been deleted three times. Johnuniq (talk) 01:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —John Z (talk) 05:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Let's do what we always do and look for GS cites. They come to zero. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete. As noted above, the claim of significance for this subject cannot be verified. —C.Fred (talk) 16:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Crank entry. Hairhorn (talk) 21:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Google scholar shows no notabiliy for his mathematical research and his claims of a proof of the Riemann hypothesis are not widely accepted. He does not seem to have had the impact necessary to pass WP:PROF #1, nor does he seem to pass any other of the WP:PROF criteria. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:12, 11 August 2009 (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.