Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kentaro Nagao


 * 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. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 15:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Kentaro Nagao

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A 2009 PhD, just hired as an Assistant Professor. Only 2 papers in MathSciNet - not yet academically notable to pass WP:PROF. Was a successful international math olympiad participant as a high school student - but too little coverage there to pass WP:BIO. Nsk92 (talk) 11:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —Nsk92 (talk) 11:54, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment (as creator): I agree, per current guidelines this article is not notable. I created it in good faith, just like Iurie Boreico, because IMHO exceptional achievements at the IMO merit notability. As of now, it is unclear whether they do or do not. I started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people), but received little response. --bender235 (talk) 11:59, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:PROF. A promising young academic, but for an article there should be more documented academic achievement. Edison (talk) 21:04, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. --Kusunose 12:03, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - bring it back when he's notable, not because he may become notable. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — -- Cirt (talk) 17:06, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Too early in his academic career to pass WP:PROF, and the IMO wins aren't enough by themselves unless they led to significant media coverage, which I don't see. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:13, 4 June 2011 (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.