Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roscoe Giles

: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 no consensus. Overall, this is leaning towards keep, but with so few !votes I would hesitate to make a judgment call. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

=[[Roscoe Giles]]=

:{{la|Roscoe Giles}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roscoe Giles}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{Find sources|Roscoe Giles}})

Appears to narrowly fail the notability standards for Academics. Tim 1357 ^talk 02:35, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Delete. Can't find any published papers, there arent even any claims of notability aside from being first black Science PhD from Stanford.--Savonneux (talk) 04:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- --Darkwind (talk) 05:05, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Weak keep. His citability is low, but he appears to have made an impact in other ways (e.g. winner of Haberman award, chair of Supercomputing 2002). —David Eppstein (talk) 17:42, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:28, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

weak keep Full professor in two departs at Boston University, a significant research university. Needs a check for publications and citations, though. DGG ( talk ) 01:56, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment When anyone searches for him note that there is a Roscoe C. Giles who is not the same person.--Savonneux (talk) 02:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:55, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Keep I don't understand what the problem is, he seems notable enough just based on the information and references already in the article. Has multiple publications at Google Scholar ("can't find any published papers"? How about [http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v16/i2/p366_1 this], [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TVN-472JWFT-1X3&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F04%2F1978&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1346821840&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=81a30ae38e147071a3ccb00b2dd39ef6 this], [http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v17/i8/p2058_1 this], [http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=CPHYE2000004000003000291000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes this], [http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v18/i2/p513_1 this]?) has won awards and chaired significant events. --MelanieN (talk) 01:20, 25 May 2010 (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.