Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Satish Nambisan


 * 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 22:41, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Satish Nambisan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

no secondary sources fail WP:GNG / WP:BIO. WP:PROF would seem appropriate standard to meet. Widefox ; talk 22:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: I'm not sure of expectations in this academic area, but WP:PROF#1 definitely looks like a possibility - GScholar shows an h-score of 21 and ten papers each with over 100 citations. Could someone advise? PWilkinson (talk) 19:31, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Good work, I'm not sure either. Widefox ; talk 12:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 06:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC).
 * Keep Several highly-cited papers, clear pass of WP:Prof. --Randykitty (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:PROF as above. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:59, 23 February 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.