Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inman Harvey


 * 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 keep. Attempts to rebut the subject's presumed notability via criterion 1 of WP:PROF appear to have be adequately answered. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  02:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Inman Harvey

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability banner has been active since February 2015. Proposed deletion due to non-notability.DanversCarew (talk) 15:09, 30 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Supportive of the decision to delete. Non-notable academic.Lesgriffin (talk) 18:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - Discussion page was created without the afd2 template and never transcluded to a daily log. Fixed now--I have no comment on the nomination itself at this time.   For future nominations, please fully follow the procedure at WP:AFDHOWTO. -- Finngall   talk  18:11, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete our sources are the university website entry on him, his own webpage (which says very little) and the world cat entry for him. Even if we accepted that the univeristy website entry on him was an indepdent, reliable 3rd party source, which would be contentious at best, the other two are either clearly not independent, or clearly not substantial. The only notability criteria he might meet for academics is criteria one, having a large impact in his field. However nothing in the article suggests that he actually meets that requirement.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:02, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:57, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:57, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. A GS h-index of 36 passes WP:Prof, even in the high-cited field of computer science. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:06, 6 August 2016 (UTC).
 * Keep per WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:13, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  17:00, 9 August 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete There is little on this page to suggest notability. The notability banner was placed in February 2015 to suggest lack of content. Yet no further, supportive material has been added since that time Joseperez22 (talk) 06:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep He appears to meet the first criterion of WP:PROF, even just based on his GS citation record. Vanamonde (talk) 07:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jcc (tea and biscuits) 14:29, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete The 3 supporters for Keep all use one and the same argument regarding the number of his citations on GS. The Notability (academics) page indicates that the Web of Knowledge and Scopus are reasonably accurate. Yet Harvey is not included in these as being highly cited or indeed he is not on the ISI Highly Cited list. The page also explicitly cautions about the use of Google Scholar and also states that "Measures of citability such as the h-index are of limited usefulness in evaluating whether Criterion 1 is satisfied". GillSanderson (talk) 13:54, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, indeed, Web of Science gives very different results with a citation report for "AUTHOR: (Harvey I*) Refined by: WEB OF SCIENCE CATEGORIES: ( COMPUTER SCIENCE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE )" (the other I. Harveys are in unrelated fields so I think this catches everything) giving:
 * Results found: 	38
 * Sum of the Times Cited [?] : 	437
 * Sum of Times Cited without self-citations [?] : 	420
 * Citing Articles [?] : 	383
 * Citing Articles without self-citations [?] : 	372
 * Average Citations per Item [?] : 	11.50
 * h-index [?] : 	10
 * Scopus gives similar results for "AUTHOR-NAME ( harvey i* )  AND  ( LIMIT-TO ( AU-ID,  "Harvey, Inman R."   7103367209 ) )", finding 559 total citations with an h-index of 12. I do however note that the last bullet point before the notes at the bottom of WP:PROF suggests that Google Scholar may be a better indicator in Computer Science. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 10:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Reliable sources tell us to avoid using Web of Science for computer science, as its failure to include conference publications leads to big distortions: see the final bullet point (just above the notes at the end of the document) in WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:23, 24 August 2016 (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.