Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vijay Devabhaktuni


 * 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   delete. Secret account 17:48, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Vijay Devabhaktuni

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Having doubts on the Academic Notability of this individiual due to lack of reliable sources and notable achievements/contributions other than a (seemingly?) prominent positions in 2 universities. Can't figure out if this page satisfies points 5 and 6 described here where i am open to discussions. You are welcome to challenge this deletion if you feel the page meets any other criteria. Sahil 13:35, 22 July 2014 (UTC) Sahil 13:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Sahil 14:13, 22 July 2014 (UTC) >


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 July 22.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 13:50, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  13:56, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment What does this have to do with Utah, User:SahilSahadevan? Just curious. Jinkinson   talk to me  13:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Reply Hi Jinkinson, My Bad . I have moved it to the Right sorted Page (Ohio), where the University of Toledo is located -- Sahil 14:13, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Cites on GS are borderline for WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:55, 23 July 2014 (UTC).
 * > Hi Xxanthippe  . I beg to differ ; Prof#C1 states that "The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed," . No such sources cited -- Sahil 05:03, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Take another look at WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:43, 23 July 2014 (UTC).
 * Hi Xxanthippe, Sorry ,I Dont get it . Could you help me go through the specific point which passes this article as a weak keep ? Thank you -- Sahil 07:57, 23 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG and fails to state a reason subject should be considered notable in lieu of sources under WP:ANYBIO.  As an WP:ACADEMIC, subject might be found notable based on his scholarly work but his profile indicates that his top paper has only received 301 citations.  (In general, a significant paper is one that received over 1000 citations.)  Perhaps it's simply WP:TOOSOON for this subject.  Msnicki (talk) 15:07, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Jay  Jay What did I do? 17:28, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Delete Nothing indicates that any criteria of WP:NACADEMICS is met.--Rpclod (talk) 17:35, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 16:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)




 * Delete. Citations are short, and fails this and other criteria for WP:PROF; no noteworthy awards (other than internal teaching awards which are a dime a dozen), no prominent academic position or responsibility, and only full professor at a middling institution. Nothing to meet WP:GEN either.Truth or consequences-2 (talk) 20:44, 7 August 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.