Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anar Ahkmedov

:{{la|Anar Ahkmedov}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Anar Ahkmedov}})

A Mathematician. Received PhD in 2006. Is an Assistant Professor at the University of Minnesota. Google scholar comes up with 14 publications (minus the duplicates). Fails WP:PROF. Note: The article has his last name spelled wrong. Last name should be aKHmedov. Bgwhite (talk) 08:37, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Bgwhite (talk) 08:38, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• Delete Per nom. I was in the middle of writing an almost identical Afd for Akhmedov when Bgwhite preempted me. GcSwRhIc (talk) 08:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
• Delete. GS h-index of 8. Too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 09:32, 19 July 2011 (UTC).
• Delete. A recently appointed Assistant Professor, was a postdoc until 2009, does not pass WP:PROF for now. Off to a strong start, as already has two papers in Inventiones Mathematicae (which is one of the most prestigious math journals), so may well become notable in several years - but not yet. Nsk92 (talk) 17:31, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
• Delete for lack of evidence of passing WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:50, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
• Delete. Premature, but probably meriting sometime in the future. Agricola44 (talk) 15:25, 20 July 2011 (UTC).
• Keep. He has an Erdos number of 4. Voyager640 (talk) 00:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
• To quote from WP:PROF: "Having a small collaboration distance from a famous or notable academic (e.g. having a small Erdos number) is not, in and of itself, indicative of satisfying Criterion 1". This is a general consequence of the WP:NOTINHERITED principle. Plus Erdos number 4 is actually pretty large (I did a random check of a few people in my math department and everybody I looked at had Erdos number 4 or smaller; my own is 3 - it really does not mean anything). Nsk92 (talk) 01:50, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

:::I second the above. I have an Erdos number of 4 and I'm a nobody. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC).

::::Erdos number is used in determining whether an integer's mathematical properties are interesting or not; see WP:1729. Voyager640 (talk) 13:20, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

:::::First, WP:1729 is just an essay, with no policy/guideline standing, unlike WP:PROF, which is a guideline. Second, even taken on its own terms, WP:1729 is entirely irrelevant to notability of individuals, as WP:1729 deals with issues of notability (or "interest") of numbers, not people. Nsk92 (talk) 17:48, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

::::::WP:1729 is a joke page. See Interesting number paradox for another joke. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:55, 21 July 2011 (UTC).

:::::::Ah yes, good point! I should have tried to read that page itself, not just its header. Nsk92 (talk) 23:16, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

• Delete. My own Erdos 2 doesn't make me notable. There's probably a stronger case for Erdos 1, but even then notability is probably established under some other more solid grounds. Sławomir Biały (talk) 23:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

::You are correct. WP:Prof makes it clear that there is no case at all for Erdos 1. Notability has to be established according to agreed policy. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC).

:::Thanks for pointing this out. It seems pretty ironclad. Sławomir Biały (talk) 10:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

: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.