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. The last comment was disregarded of course, but consensus is still that he is not (yet) notable for a Wikipedia article. NW (Talk) 16:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fady Alnajjar

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Autobiography wiht no evidence of notability. None of the refs are about the subject. Dicklyon (talk) 18:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I don't see any evidence that this person satisfies WP:ACADEMIC. I can't find any sources that would satisfy WP:BIO either. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 18:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:07, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject might be notable, for all I know, but none of the sources demonstrate this. Nwlaw63 (talk) 20:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Early career researcher with little record yet. Too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:16, 26 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. H-index 2 on 4 publications and 9 total citations – very typical for a new (2010) PhD. Xxanthippe correctly pegs this as premature. Article created by WP:SPA account Fadyone suggests this may just be a vanity article. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 23:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. I believe the subject has a list of over 25 publications, a number of international awards, plus newspaper meeting, adding this to the page is acceptable then to be an evidence for notability?. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.160.96.253 (talk) 06:48, 27 January 2011 (UTC) — 134.160.96.253 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

I count only 4, as I mentioned above. Are you referring to other works, perhaps internal documents or working papers, that are not available outside his institution? (I ask because I noticed via Geolocate that you're at the same institution as the subject:) Agricola44 (talk) 15:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Delete. His CIMCA'05 paper has 16 citations in Google scholar, not bad for something that recent, but that's far from enough to demonstrate the impact needed to pass WP:PROF#C1. As for the awards listed at his cv, they're mostly student awards, except for one vanity scam one. What it adds up to to me is what one would expect to see for a just-graduated researcher on a good track, but it's very rare for someone at that level to be notable by our standards and I don't think he's one of the rare exceptions. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:52, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree that it is early to be in wikipedia at this time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fadyone (talk • contribs) 09:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC) — Fadyone (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete He is Arabic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.51.22.188 (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hope everyone will disregard this inflammatory comment. Geolocate shows this IP as being close-by the anon comment above and both of these anons are in the same geographic area as the subject of the article. (One is actually at the same institution.) They are very possibly one in the same person. Hopefully there will not be any more provocative comments to disrupt the normal debate here! Thanks, Agricola44 (talk) 19:58, 28 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]

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.