Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milutin Dostanić


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:31, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Milutin Dostanić

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This was a PROD but I don't think it's appropriate for PROD. The information seems mostly reliable. WP:BEFORE requires that certain things are checked, and a better job can be done with citation counts, etc. An obituary somewhere would be nice. Barney the barney barney (talk) 14:23, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * -PS remember that Serbian sources are OK too. Barney the barney barney (talk) 23:12, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, as per the prod, which I see no reason to have removed.-- Jac 16888 Talk 16:14, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:56, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Searching for the author's publications in Google scholar (both under Dostanic and Достанић) did not turn up enough citations to indicate a pass of WP:PROF, and there is no indication that he passes any other notability criterion. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:29, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. If you check the deletion log you'll see that a previous version had been prodded and deleted in 2011 with a rationale "MathSciNet shows a large number of publications, but very little citability. Similarly little citability in GScholar and GBooks. Does not appear to pass WP:PROF on other grounds either." This has apparently not changed. De728631 (talk) 15:29, 27 January 2014 (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.