Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sophia Drossopoulou


 * 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The result was   Keep (withdrawn by nominator). Espresso Addict (talk) 22:00, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Sophia Drossopoulou

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

Fails WP:BIO as it has no independant, reliable sources and fails to meet the criteria laid out by WP:BIO, specifically that this woman has made no significant concepts or theories. As far as I can tell, this woman is not regarded as innovative or important by her peers. Per WP:ACADEMIC, this article fails points 1 through to 10. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 18:00, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Although not fully inline with WP:ACADEMIC, the person has authored nearly 170 publications, some of them very widely cited. Has also served as editor for at least two major conference proceedings. If someone in the area of work could verify extent of her research, that would be good. LeaveSleaves talk 18:37, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Full professor at reputable institution. The high citations of her various papers and reviews of the Java type safety question found by Google Scholar (top 156, 144, 104) appear evidence of meeting WP:PROF. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe for a woman to have reached this level in computing is still relatively unusual. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Copying the comment of the article creator on the talk page in response to a speedy tag here for ease of reference. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This article was marked for speedy deletion on the grounds that the importance is not stated. However, the work that she has done on the soundness of the Java programming language was very important and has been acknowledged widely: essentially this consists of a mathematical proof that the constructs in this language are consistent and correct. This is currently only proven for a handful of languages Cngoulimis (talk) 17:48, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - I am not sure were you looked to make the statement “…this woman is not regarded as innovative or important by her peers“, but I believe you did not look at Google Scholar, as shown here . In just the first two listings, out of several hundred, she is credited with 300 cites.  That, in my thinking, is pretty notable.  Not to mention a full professorship at a the 6th ranked universities overall in the world? Thanks . ShoesssS Talk 20:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Withdraw nomination per the comments above. I seemed to have missed the fact that full professorship is immediately considered notable when combined with citations. My apologies. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 21:27, 21 December 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.