Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toomas Kivisild


 * 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) T ofutwitch11  (T ALK ) 15:17, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Toomas Kivisild

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication of notability. Natureium (talk) 21:18, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller!  (distænt write)  21:53, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller!  (distænt write)  21:53, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller!  (distænt write)  21:53, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Estonia-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller!  (distænt write)  21:53, 23 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:PROF with a SCOPUS h-index of 53 for 143 publications, and 28 publications with over 200 citations each on Google Scholar. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:43, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That's nice and all, but are there any sources about him aside from those published by his own university? If there's no information available, you can't write an article. Natureium (talk) 19:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you sure that's what WP:PROF means? Wqwt (talk) 17:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Most of his publications have group author lists (not unusual in this area of science), but he has several first-author papers having >300 citations each. This is a conclusive pass of PROF c1. Regarding sources about him, the published papers are RS and give enough information for a short article (institutions, research area, etc). This is the case with numerous existing WP science BLPs. Agricola44 (talk) 19:56, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:PROF and the highly cited first-author publications identified above. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep -- meets WP:PROF & "coauthored the second edition of the textbook Human Evolutionary Genetics". Sufficient for a stub-class article. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:06, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of impact factor per WP:PROF, however, article needs improvement, specifically removal of external links in body. Chetsford (talk) 17:52, 28 January 2018 (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.