Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Libes

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Don Libes}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Don Libes}})

Article does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, because there is no significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Most references are primary or technical sources rather than in-depth third-party discussions of Don Libes himself. The article reads more like a CV than an appropriate Wiki biography Neurorocker (talk) 02:31, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Computing, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:50, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Very weak delete. The nominator has not fully understood the notability criteria for academics, WP:NPROF, and it appears has also not done a detailed WP:Before. Understandable since they are relatively new, but still not the best. That aside I cannot find enough citations of his papers to convince me that he passes WP:NPROF#C1. There are some reviews of his books, so there is some WP:NAUTHOR contribution. I could not find his CV, which may be available to DOE or NIST personnel. Hence I don't know about awards. I lean delete, unconvincingly. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:08, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

:

• Keep. Their [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C6&q=don+libes&btnG= Google Scholar] page seems to sufficiently demonstrate their notability as an academic. Madeleine (talk) 03:03, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

:

• I looked for biographical sources, and there just aren't any. This person's software is documented, not least by this person. ☺ But this person xyrself is not. Which is why the article gives almost half its length to expect and in the other half has claims that I cannot source. For example, the claim to being first to port a piece of software is not sourceable. The original paper is silent on whether it was the first, and no-one else appears to have recorded it as such since. I cannot find a source that doesn't come from Wikipedia that records this person doing this at all, the available sourcing on this person's work being that poor.

  In fact, only people named Don Libes have written about Don Libes, everywhere.

  Excluding books where the author is Don Libes outright, I found a CRC Press book with a potted biography that looked promising, until I saw "Prepared by Don Libes." at the foot of the text. The person who wrote what Wikipedia now has is {{user|Donlibes}}, replacing a much shorter article — which was, it transpires, written by Don Libes, since it was copied from xyr NIST autobiography ({{Archive url|title=Don Libes BIO|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070502192031/http://www.mel.nist.gov/msidstaff/libes/|archive-date=2007-05-02|original-url=http://www.mel.nist.gov/msidstaff/libes/}}) with first-person pronouns replaced by third person.

  It is impossible, as we can see, for anyone to write a biography if one isn't one of these Don Libeses, which isn't how Wikipedia works. ☺

  Uncle G (talk) 00:44, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, I cannot find any independent sigcov of the subject to meet the GNG and his position and citation stats don't seem to meet NPROF. Toadspike [Talk] 07:35, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.