Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hyun Sung Kim


 * 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. Nja 247 19:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Hyun Sung Kim

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

cryptographer, doesn't seem to be especially notable, no real sources. Plus most likely autobiographical Jac 16888 Talk 18:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —David Eppstein (talk) 19:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not seem yet to pass notability requirements under WP:PROF or WP:BIO. Citation impact seems to be low at the moment. May become notable in the future.--Eric Yurken (talk) 02:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions.  —PC78 (talk) 11:27, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete could not find any Korean news on him. I'll say he has zero notability in South Korea.--Caspian blue 12:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I have updated this article for a positive. --Athos, Porthos, and Aramis (talk) 20:22, 25 April 2009 (UTC) (one for each)
 * Keep, Keep, Keep - It is a Korean stub. The education system in Korea is as good as in the US especially in engineering, science and math. The university is a well known in Asia. I have seen notable articles on wiki which are as good as this - Moderately good amount of citations that are good to pass this. Keep it - I vote 'yes' once for all - may be the 1st 'Yes'.
 * Delete per nom.--CyberGhostface (talk) 23:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, doesn't meet notability. Country is irrelevant even though Korean education system is likely better.  Notability of university does not confer notability on professors. Drawn Some (talk) 01:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have seen questions on wiki about the notability of schools in underdeveloped/developing/developed countries to verify someone's notability. I'm not a Korean, but heard good things of schools in Asia. Let me sayt that the level of education in Science, Math and Engineering in Asia (India, ...) are much superior. You know what Gates thinks about the Software Engineers from India... --Athos, Porthos, and Aramis (talk) 12:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Scopus, in agreement with GScholar, shows 21 articles, the most having been cited 13 times. In afield as active as this, it does not make for notability. DGG (talk) 03:26, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought 13 is good for designing hardware architectures. 22 articles are lots of. It is not software/software applications--Athos, Porthos, and Aramis (talk) 13:20, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you give us some comparisons with other people? DGG (talk) 02:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I was looking for a professor (notable) on wikipedia who is specialized in hardware architecture (i'm still searching now) . Comparing with the other disciplines would not be fair. This person is born in 1971. His numbers (citations) will go up to at least 40 from 13 if you wait another 30 years. Rather than making him notable then (he would be 70 almost), why we should not now. He is too young compared to many.

--Athos, Porthos, and Aramis (talk) 11:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I could not find any one on wiki with his matchings (a professor specialized in computer hardware). I'm stuck. May be I do not know how to searchj!!

--Athos, Porthos, and Aramis (talk) 01:13, 30 April 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.