Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Athar Ata

: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. Wifione Message 12:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

=[[Athar Ata]]=

:{{la|Athar Ata}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Athar Ata}})

Fails WP:ACADEMIC and I have doubts about WP:GNG Sitush (talk) 14:23, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Comment Looking at the edit history, this should have been speedy deleted just after creation as being blanked by its sole author... --Guillaume2303 (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

: Um, [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Athar+Ata%22 GScholar turns up about 72 papers] of his, and they seem to have quite a lot of citations. Has anyone calculated an index for him? Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:45, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

::72 is nothing for a scientist, and I am not sure that they are all him in any event. - Sitush (talk) 21:48, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete 72 papers is a very respectable number, I don't know what field Sitush is talking about... However, even assuming that all papers in the GScholar search linked by Chiswick Chap are indeed by Ata, they have only been cited for a total of 339 times with an h-index of 11, which is decidedly below what usually is taken here as indicating notability. I see no evidence that the awards mentioned in the article are anything else than local awards. Does not meet WP:PROF. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 21:58, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

:*No worries. Perhaps the longevity of a person affects things. And perhaps I am just acquainted with seriously clever chemists etc. An h-index for social scientists would be an interesting exercise ... and a comparison of the relevance of "paper count", "cite rate" etc of AfD consensus re: academic scientists vs. the arts would be even more so. Not that these whimsies matter, however, for this or any other specific nomination - just food for thought. - Sitush (talk) 00:19, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete. Currently fails WP:ACADEMIC, since h-index is currently too low, awards are purely local, and Google shows no other evidence of notability. This article can be recreated when his career crosses the notability threshold. -- 202.124.74.197 (talk) 13:03, 26 January 2012 (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.