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. Closing this per WP:SNOW as per the discussion that the subject meets point #3 of WP:NACADEMICS, and of the specific criteria notes for WP:NACADEMICS meets point #3 and point #1. (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:54, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jean-Pol Vigneron[edit]

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

I don't see that this is a notable individual. Being a member of an academy, no matter how notable does not infer notability in itself. Shritwod (talk) 13:44, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep An elected member of a national academy of sciences clearly meets WP:ACADEMIC#3. --Randykitty (talk) 17:30, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. As well as the clear pass of WP:PROF#C3 given as the deletion rationale (!) he also passes #C1 by virtue of highly cited publications: Google scholar lists 17 papers with over 100 citations each and (assuming all the listed pubs are his and not some other J.P.Vigneron) an h-index of 51, well above our usual standards for keeping an article based on that criterion. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Clearly as above. Would the nominator like to explain the steps he took to carry out WP:Before? Xxanthippe (talk) 21:57, 26 March 2014 (UTC).[reply]

The article follows a pattern of article creation which may be paid editing by editor Flaviohmg. The article lacks detail which makes it look suspicious, including the rather notable fact that the subject died in a car accident. Perhaps then it simply needs expansion. Shritwod (talk) 22:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

what on earth has dying in a car accident got to do with it? Xxanthippe (talk) 23:42, 26 March 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Speedy keep -- per David Epstein, Xxanthippe and others, plus a memorial conference. All notable. Suggest that the nominator withdraw. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 00:01, 27 March 2014 (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.