Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Karplus


 * 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. John254 00:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Kevin Karplus

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

not known to me whether this passes WP:N, but it's unsourced, and definitely a violation of WP:COI, as it's a single author whose name is nearly identical to the subject of the article KV5  •  Squawk box  •  Fight on!  23:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. 383 hits at google scholar; 128 hits at google books; gnews hits; ghits. Seems to meet Notability (academics). Sourcing and WP:COI issues can be solved by editing.-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  00:24, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree with Fabrictramp: GoogleScholar results show high citability of his work with top citation hits of 404, 387, 201, 177, 156, 120. Appears to pass WP:PROF as the author of highly cited works. Nsk92 (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Fabrictramp and Nsk92. --Crusio (talk) 06:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Nsk92 demonstrably influential, highly cited. Pete.Hurd (talk) 02:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep only if improved - as it's unsourced and therefore unverified, but he may, in fact be notable. We just don't know it yet. -  Toon  05  21:11, 8 August 2008 (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.