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. Daniel (talk) 10:33, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dmitry Zinoviev (author)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I'm not seeing much to warrant a pass of WP:NPROF or WP:NAUTHOR. Most notable activity might be Parovoz IS? This article also seems to be autobiographical. Kj cheetham (talk) 18:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 18:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 18:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 18:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 18:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:07, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Far from my area but the Google Scholar citation profile looks ok-ish; 168,132,114,71,64, although all are multiauthor and one has ten authors. The top citations are for old papers 1993–2001, when citation wasn't as heavy as it is now. If this had been started independently I'd be leaning keep. Espresso Addict (talk) 15:01, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The h-index of 16 strikes me as fairly low for CS, given the area, and the top cites aren't that high either. I am not seeing here enough to pass WP:PROF. I am not sure if there is significant coverage of him in relation to Parovoz IS but even if yes, at the most it seems to be a WP:BIO1E situation, and he is already mentioned in the Parovoz IS article. Plus this does look like a WP:AUTO case. Nsk92 (talk) 17:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only works with three-digit citations in his Google Scholar profile are from his postdoctoral research in a physics lab, there are only three of them, and one is a review paper that shouldn't count so much towards academic notability. In his main line of research in computer science, a high-citation area, there is no visible impact. So I don't think he passes WP:PROF#C1 and there seems to be nothing else. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:57, 19 February 2021 (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.