Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Wasserman


 * 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) 00:13, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Tony Wasserman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Is this entrepreneur/professor notable enough? I don't see it. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 18:56, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:57, 1 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. Surprisingly few cites on GS but university web site claims he is is a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC).
 * Keep. His ACM and IEEE Fellow awards appear to both be for commercial rather than academic accomplishments, so I'm not sure whether they should really count for WP:PROF, but they're a high enough level recognition of the subject that I think we should keep his article regardless. And he has five publications with 100+ citations each in Google scholar, so I think he does also pass WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:Prof as well as IEEE fellow. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC).
 * Keep per Xxanthippe. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per David Eppstein. Appears notable as an academic. --Michig (talk) 22:05, 3 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.