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. -- Cirt (talk) 07:05, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Abhinav Kumar[edit]

Abhinav Kumar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Deprodded page on assistant prof at MIT. No doubt promising, but there are about 2 million university professors in the world, and he does not pass WP:PROF. Single digit h-index. Abductive (reasoning) 04:03, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Does not pass WP:PROF. CrossTempleJay  talk 09:26, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree he does not appear to meet the criteria. --Kumioko (talk) 18:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Kumar is a common name. Input from mathematicians needed. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:10, 7 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete. He has some papers with quite high citation counts for their recency and their field, and in very good journals (e.g. Annals), but these are all with Henry Cohn, a more well-established mathematician. According to MathSciNet the two papers MR2427457 and MR1900858 are the only ones (other than his Ph.D. thesis) that he has that are not with Cohn, and I don't think they're as high profile as the rest of his portfolio. So while he's on an excellent trajectory, I think it's still too early in his career for him to have demonstrated independent impact of the type that WP:PROF#C1 requires. And I think none of the other WP:PROF criteria is even plausible. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:38, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per David Eppstein. I might add, by way of comment, extraordinarily impressive trajectory. Ray^Talk 17:41, 7 May 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.