Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean-Philippe Aumasson

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jean-Philippe Aumasson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No establishment of notability using WP:RS. Amigao (talk) 20:16, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Cryptocurrency, Mathematics, Computing, and France. Skynxnex (talk) 12:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 12:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Far from my area but notability should be examined under WP:PROF; this appears to be his GS profile [1] with top citations 418,360,357,276,244 and a further two papers over 200 citations and a total of ten papers over 100 citns. There's a fairly low total number of papers though and his PhD only dates from 2009. Espresso Addict (talk) 13:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Espresso Addict (talk) 13:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 16:51, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Soft delete (treat like expired PROD). Cannot find enough evidence that this passes WP:PROF, but far enough outside my main areas of expertise to have a good sense of what passes or doesn't in this field. Only weighing in since this has two relistings and needs some direction. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 21:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.