Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noureldien Hussein


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Noureldien Hussein

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Vanity article on a non-notable computer vision researcher; the sources do not establish WP:GNG / WP:BIO. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)


 * delete. Lacks the multiple reliable independent secondary sources required to demonstrate notability. Links to the subject's papers and patents don't count.  Also, for a CS academic, his citation count of 126 is decidedly unimpressive.  Msnicki (talk) 12:02, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment: Thanks for the thoughtful discussion. I would like to mention two reasons for the notability of this subject. (1) The subject has won two international awards, which are not trivial. These awards, as mentioned in the page, are (a) "first place in Microsoft Imagine Cup for Mobile Development" (PC Magazine 2012), and (b) "the 3rd place in Imagine Cup Grant" (TechCrunch 2012), see also "Imagine Cup Grant 2012" (Microsoft News 2012) (2) The second reason for notability is that the scientific contribution of the subject is demonstrated by a few U.S. published patents (scientific inventions), see "US20200302185A1" and "US10496885B2" -- PTraumatic (talk) 12:30, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:PROF and doesn't appear to pass any other relevant criterion either. The book seems to be self-published, and more importantly unreviewed. Minor awards are (very) minor, and patents aren't grounds for notability. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:57, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment:, Two independent reviewers voted for a delete. Then most likely they are right. Do you vote for moving it to the draft untill the subject becomes notable? I know that notability takes years. But let's move it to the draft. I for one, would not work on it anymore. I will keep working on ther subjects. What do you think? -- PTraumatic (talk) 22:00, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Draft space is not for indefinite storage of pages on non-notable topics. There's no point in moving this article over there when it'll just be deleted under G13 in six months anyway. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 23:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. Scopus has 3 published works for a total citation count of 33, although there are at least 5 preprints on the arXiv which Scopus doesn't index cites for. Regardless, way too soon for this article. JoelleJay (talk) 05:47, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Computer vision is a very high citation subfield of computer science, itself a high-citation field, so the citations to his works are far from WP:PROF. Having publications and patents is not by itself enough for notability, and the contest wins presented in the article appear too minor to count for much. That leaves book authorship, which is also inadequate. One book, by itself, is almost never enough for WP:AUTHOR, and we would in any case need multiple published reviews and I can find none. From what I can find on the web the book appears self-published but I suspect that technically it may not be; it looks like a Dutch Ph.D. dissertation and those are usually printed in small batches by publishers specialized to that purpose. In any case the publication status is less important than the lack of multiple reviews for multiple books. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:38, 21 March 2021 (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.