Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keith Conrad

: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. Consensus is that he does not meet WP:ACADEMIC. The reasons cited in favor of the Keep argument do not satisfy WP:ACADEMIC. --MelanieN (talk) 23:35, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

=[[Keith Conrad]]=

:{{la|Keith Conrad}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Keith_Conrad Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Keith Conrad}})

This article is about a non-notable person. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:14, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete. Besides having a more-notable twin in the same field (not a notability criterion), I see nothing by which he stands out as more than a typical working mathematician, and in particular no evidence of passing WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:31, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep He's an associate professor and [http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=Keith+Conrad&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp= Google Scholar] shows his paper, "A q-Analogue of Mahler Expansions, I", cited 20+ times, and his paper, "The Digit Principle", cited 30+ times. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 20:26, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Fails every criterion of WP:ACADEMIC by a mile. --Randykitty (talk) 22:14, 3 June 2015 (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.