Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikil Dutt

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. WP:SNOW (non-admin closure) Pcap ping 15:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nikil Dutt

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

Comparatively it looks like he may not be wiki notable - needs updating the facts DoNotTellDoNotAsk (talk) 01:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Substantial book list. Editor-in-chief of an ACM journal. Looks like substantial notability per WP:PROF and/or WP:GNG. LotLE×talk 01:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. GS cites are 999, 326, 227, 169 ... etc. h index = 46, if I counted correctly. Superlative pass at WP:Prof #1. Also holds named chair and passes Prof #5. Served as Editor-in-Chief of ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems (TODAES) between 2004-2008 so passes WP:Prof #8. Nomination is so inadequate that I have to conclude that it was likely made in bad faith. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Keep, Highly cited, h-index above 40, journal editorships, including being an Editor-in-Chief, plus IEEE Fellow. More than enough to pass WP:PROF. Nsk92 (talk) 02:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In fact, I suggest a speedy close. The nominator himself says that the subject is likely notable and does not appear to advocate deletion. Nsk92 (talk) 02:56, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Being a IEEE Fellow alone qualifies for notability under the WP:PROF standard, besides all the other reasons listed above. Abecedare (talk) 02:58, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all above. Salih (talk) 04:22, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep per WP:SNOW? Bearian (talk) 04:38, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Xxanthippe. JBsupreme (talk) 07:27, 4 February 2010 (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.