Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mojżesz David Kirszbraun


 * 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The result was   keep, withdrawn. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:12, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Mojżesz David Kirszbraun

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

The subject does not pass WP:PROF, except possibly the first criterion
 * The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

The single paper written by the subject has been cited on the order of 100 times according to Google scholar. This is significant, even given the subjects low h-score of 1, but it is not enough to build an encyclopedia article around. Mr. Kirszbraun should be mentioned in the article on Kirszbraun's theorem, but there are no sources on the subject and there will never be enough content for a separate article. Sławomir Biały (talk) 13:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


 * There is an entry about Kirszbraun written by Edward Marczewski in the polish biographical dictionary. Once I get it I will add more information. Also I believe that he published more than one paper, but it is hard to find.--Tosha (talk) 16:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * P.S. From WP:PROF: If an academic/professor meets ANY one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, they are notable; so #1 is enough.
 * Oh, I don't disagree. But I said that he fails except possibly the first criterion, and then I proceeded to explain how he fails that as well, as well as the general provision on the existence of sources, per WP:V, although that seems no longer to be an issue.  Sławomir Biały  (talk) 12:21, 31 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:59, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment If Tosha could produce a citation for that biographical dictionary, then this is a keep under WP:GNG - people with print encyclopedia entries about them rather by definition have significant coverage in a secondary source independent of the subject. Ray  Talk 01:33, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The job is done :)--Tosha (talk) 04:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Tosha and provision of a source. Ray  Talk 14:23, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep If he's notable enough for a print encyclopedia, he's notable enough for Wikipedia. Edward321 (talk) 10:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn. Per conversation with User:Piotrus, having an entry in the Polish Biographical Dictionary establishes notability under the general notability guideline. ‎  Sławomir Biały  (talk) 15:55, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Lots of other mathematicians have written on or expanded upon Kirszbraun's work – impact (notability) is obvious – I've added several references. Thanks, Agricola44 (talk) 16:26, 1 November 2010 (UTC).
 * PS. Circumstances of his death should be cited (perhaps the above encyc article?) or this statement should be removed. Thanks, Agricola44 (talk) 16:29, 1 November 2010 (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.