Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tore Dybå


 * 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. Meets WP:ACADEMIC per consensus. (non-admin closure) -- Dane 2007  talk 14:21, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Tore Dybå

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Self-written vanity page, doesn't meet the prof test Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  05:53, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak I think it's a bit harsh to just state that this is a vanity page that doesn't meet the prof. test. I thought that meeting the following notability criteria for academics was sufficient? " 1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. 2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level." The references provided substantiates this through their original, reliable sources showing 1) Ranked as no one on the world based on number of publications and number of citations and 2) receiving a Paper Impact award for the paper with the highest impact in the field during the last 10 years. I'd like to now why you think these facts do not meet the above stated notability guidelines? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toredy (talk • contribs) 11:50, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * , please see WP:COI, WP:Autobiography, you should not be writing about yourself. I posted here because there is a claim of notability, and it's not suitable for speedy deletion. You are entitled to post a "keep" response here (start of sentence, bolded, following an asterisk) with your reasons as stated above, and it's then up to others to express their views. If it becomes clear that I've not got this right, I'll withdraw the nom and close this AFD Jimfbleak - talk to me?  12:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

, Thank you for your comment, I have read WP:COI, WP:Autobiography, and I understand them. If they trump notability, I will rest my case. But it doesn't seem fair given the thousands of similar, short pages about other (notable) academics. So, what I'd like to see, is that the moderators explain what it is with the two stated achievements that do not meet the academic notability guidelines. I'm just puzzled with what I experience as unfounded attacks...
 * Keep Writing autobiographies is strongly discouraged but not forbidden. This seems to be a rare case where a notable person has written a pretty decent autobiography. Meets WP:ACADEMIC. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  15:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Article is autobiographical promotion. The article lacks in mainstream, objective, unbiased sources. I think the contents of this article do not meet WP:N, but may be notable enough to be mentioned in an article about the research or relative subject matter. { MordeKyle }   &#9762;  19:25, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep According to, I could post a "keep" response. So, here it is: Although it's an autobiography, it should be clear from the awards section of the page that the person meets WP:ACADEMIC. I have also done my best to keep the formulations factual and neutral, as if I was writing about someone else. The claim that the article "lacks in mainstream, objective, unbiased sources" should be substantiated with due reference to WP:ACADEMIC and the sources provided in the awards section of the article. Tore (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Tentative Keep -- the article needs to be toned down to look less like a resume, but the subject appears to be notable, see for example author bio from Agile Software Development: Current Research and Future Directions. Most likely meets WP:ACADEMIC and / or WP:AUTHOR. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:45, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep on basis of GS cites. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:07, 3 November 2016 (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.