371:: Good point, but I would be careful with google scholar counts as they don't filter for self-citation, double counted preprint/tech-report versions of papers, etc. Better (in my opinon) would be to use Web of Science, but if an academic is notable, you would think there would be articles and press releases already written attesting to notability. For example, look at his advisor's page,
400:
has 42 publications. It also lists several plenary/keynote lectures and notes that he was on the panel for "Research
Directions and Enabling Technologies for the Future of CS&E" at the SIAM Conference on Computational Science and Engineering, 2007. He definitely comes close, in
415:
It's not just that WoS has spotty journal coverage for this area. It's also that in the sort of computational science de
Sturler does, a lot of the publications are in conferences rather than journals and WoS doesn't cover them at all; I haven't checked what of de Sturler's pubs are covered but I
416:
suspect his two highest-cited according to Google aren't in WoS. So I would be inclined to trust the Google scholar results. However, what I'm seeing in Google scholar isn't quite enough to convince me of a pass of
154:
273:
120:
389:
On the other hand, Web of
Science's coverage of mathematics journals is not that good. However, here are the raw counts: 17 publications, 187 citations (top is
179:
229:
COI is not reason to delete, and all arguments on that basis are irrelevant. someone able to do so needs to analyze the importance of his actual work.
325:. He is not known for any important algorithms or theorems. He has some publications, but so does every academic professor in his field. The
87:
82:
318:
131:
330:
91:
17:
74:
454:
36:
298:
453:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
429:
165:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
433:
410:
384:
363:
338:
334:
309:
288:
261:
240:
221:
204:
169:
143:
56:
406:
380:
257:
217:
200:
139:
359:
78:
425:
161:
372:
347:
402:
376:
305:
284:
253:
213:
196:
135:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
417:
351:
329:
appears to cite no sources beyond de
Sturler's own webpage, which is questionable for a BLP.
390:
355:
326:
249:
192:
70:
62:
420:#1, and there's little hint of a pass of the other criteria. Overall, I see this as a
398:
189:
236:
301:
280:
50:
108:
354:
criterion #1 (significant impact in scholarly discipline, broadly construed).--
321:, which only leaves criteria 1, but I see no reliable indication of impact by
231:
394:
178:: Article was first created by IP 128.174.245.145, which is at the
447:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
134:: e.g., on the editorial board, but not an editor-in-chief, ...
155:
list of
Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
350:, I would say he either meets or is very close to meeting
397:
with 85), h-index = 7. De
Sturler's own publication list
317:
since he does not meet criteria 2,3,4,5,6,7,8, or 9 in
186:
183:
115:
104:
100:
96:
248:: Good point, thank you. I just read that section in
300:
which establishes, I suggest, sufficient notability.
130:: Does not meet any of the nine criteria listed in
274:list of Living people-related deletion discussions
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
457:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
348:he has well over 300 citations to his pubs
180:University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
272:: This debate has been included in the
153:: This debate has been included in the
132:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (academics)
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
191:, it looks like there could be a
182:. Checking this first version
1:
434:17:15, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
411:14:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
385:02:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
364:02:03, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
339:21:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
310:13:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
289:09:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
262:04:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
241:04:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
222:03:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
205:03:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
170:03:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
144:03:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
57:04:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
212:because it's non-notable.
474:
319:WP:Notability (academics)
185:and an edit by "DutchMom"
450:Please do not modify it.
188:who only edits this page
32:Please do not modify it.
297:Published in field per
395:10.1007/PL00013391
373:Henk van der Vorst
44:The result was
291:
277:
172:
158:
465:
452:
323:reliable sources
278:
268:
159:
149:
118:
112:
94:
53:
34:
473:
472:
468:
467:
466:
464:
463:
462:
461:
455:deletion review
448:
401:my opinion. --
114:
85:
71:Eric de Sturler
69:
66:
63:Eric de Sturler
51:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
471:
469:
460:
459:
443:
442:
441:
440:
439:
438:
437:
436:
426:David Eppstein
341:
312:
292:
266:
265:
264:
224:
207:
173:
162:David Eppstein
125:
124:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
470:
458:
456:
451:
445:
444:
435:
431:
427:
423:
419:
414:
413:
412:
408:
404:
399:
396:
392:
388:
387:
386:
382:
378:
374:
370:
367:
366:
365:
361:
357:
353:
349:
345:
342:
340:
336:
332:
328:
324:
320:
316:
313:
311:
307:
303:
299:
296:
293:
290:
286:
282:
275:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
251:
247:
244:
243:
242:
238:
234:
233:
228:
225:
223:
219:
215:
211:
208:
206:
202:
198:
194:
190:
187:
184:
181:
177:
174:
171:
167:
163:
156:
152:
148:
147:
146:
145:
141:
137:
133:
129:
122:
117:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
67:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
449:
446:
421:
403:Jitse Niesen
377:Plastikspork
368:
343:
331:76.199.2.120
322:
314:
294:
269:
254:Plastikspork
245:
230:
226:
214:FaerieInGrey
209:
197:Plastikspork
195:. Just FYI.
175:
150:
136:Plastikspork
127:
126:
49:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
422:weak delete
356:Eric Yurken
344:Weak keep
281:• Gene93k
346:. Since
246:response
121:View log
418:WP:PROF
369:comment
352:WP:PROF
302:Collect
227:comment
176:Comment
88:protect
83:history
52:MBisanz
327:WP:BLP
315:Delete
250:WP:COI
210:Delete
193:WP:COI
128:Delete
116:delete
92:delete
119:) – (
109:views
101:watch
97:links
16:<
430:talk
407:talk
381:talk
360:talk
335:talk
306:talk
295:Keep
285:talk
270:Note
258:talk
237:talk
218:talk
201:talk
166:talk
151:Note
140:talk
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
424:. —
391:doi
279:--
276:.
232:DGG
157:.
432:)
409:)
383:)
375:.
362:)
337:)
308:)
287:)
260:)
252:.
239:)
220:)
203:)
168:)
142:)
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
48:.
428:(
405:(
393::
379:(
358:(
333:(
304:(
283:(
256:(
235:(
216:(
199:(
164:(
160:—
138:(
123:)
113:(
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.