471:, not GNG. For PROF notability, we still need claims to be verifiable, but as long as the claims meet at least one PROF criterion and the sources that verify them are reliable, there is nothing requiring the sources to cover the personal life of the subject in-depth nor to be independent. And in this case we do have independent sources covering the subject's research contributions in-depth, which is exactly what one would expect and hope for in the case of someone supposedly notable for their research contributions. —
449:: The first two references cited do not pertain directly to the individual subject. The other sources are not independent of the subject. The Google Scholar page does indicate some significance with the total citation count, but it is weak. There are no honors, awards, or past chair designations in organizations either. There should be more for this article to be useful to the academic readers of the encyclopedia.
401:. There's not a lot that we can source and put in his article beyond his basic career details and the concepts he's credited with, but I think those are enough. If it were only based on citation counts my keep would be weak, but putting a name to the concepts credited to him, and the (justified) existence of separate Knowledge (XXG) articles for those concepts, makes the case stronger. —
486:
Furthermore, there are no honors, awards, or chair designations. The role of director in a low-scale university laboratory is questionable. The citation count on Google
Scholar is not high. And the remainder of the references originated from the subject, the subject's colleagues, or the subject's employer and do not indicate a strong impact on his profession.
515:
The significance of his research work is debatable, which is why I am not either in favor of or against this AfD process. What should be noted is that the Wiki page for Lutz's resource-bounded measure has no functional references. And any search for them does not yield any indication of a significant
500:
11 publications with over citations each is quite high, for this theoretical area. Beyond that, we have works directly attesting to the significance of the topics Lutz has developed and explaining them in depth. The remainder of the references are not intended to establish notability, only to verify
485:
I believe you misunderstood the commentary; it did not pertain to WP:GNG. For the notability criterion of WP:PROF, the subject nearly does not meet any of it. The significance of the individual's research work should be demonstrable through multiple reliable, independent sources, which it lacks.
380:. Through elicit.org, I found that quite a few of these papers either build upon or critique (but don't discredit) his hypotheses, so they'd be quite usable here. I won't link them all, but for example, a Springer textbook (
516:
impact on the profession, aside from a few mentions in peer-reviewed journals. Regardless, most AfD participants will likely agree that the research work has at least some importance that merits consideration.
204:
264:
355:
161:
268:
335:
198:
331:
93:
108:
327:
260:
88:
81:
17:
546:
102:
98:
134:
129:
219:
138:
567:
40:
542:
186:
165:
121:
281:
245:
506:
476:
406:
377:
180:
384:, 2010, Downey & Hirschfeldt) provides significant coverage of his ideas across multiple chapters. —
298:
563:
315:
36:
176:
272:
236:
550:
525:
510:
495:
480:
458:
441:
429:
410:
393:
367:
347:
320:
288:
252:
63:
521:
502:
491:
472:
454:
438:
402:
212:
418:
per David
Eppstein, a mix of PROF-C1 and being credited with significant concepts in the field. --
363:
343:
226:
58:
77:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
562:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
501:
the details in the article. And multiple PROF criteria are not required when one is passed. —
468:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
302:
464:
389:
517:
487:
450:
425:
192:
125:
359:
339:
53:
463:
You appear to be evaluating this article based on the wrong notability criterion,
155:
297:— His work seems to be notable and significant in his field, which is enough for
385:
419:
117:
69:
235:
There doesn't appear to be coverage of his work in independent sources.
558:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
151:
147:
143:
211:
225:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
570:). No further edits should be made to this page.
356:list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions
354:Note: This discussion has been included in the
326:Note: This discussion has been included in the
259:Note: This discussion has been included in the
8:
109:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
353:
325:
258:
437:per David Eppstein, passes NPROF-1. --
382:Algorithmic Randomness and Complexity
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
541:per David Eppstein, passes NPROF-1.
24:
330:lists for the following topics:
263:lists for the following topics:
94:Introduction to deletion process
378:been cited a respectable amount
1:
84:(AfD)? Read these primers!
587:
551:08:42, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
526:21:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
511:15:51, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
496:13:10, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
481:07:19, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
459:04:11, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
442:20:13, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
430:11:24, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
411:22:21, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
394:16:45, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
368:11:37, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
348:11:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
321:07:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
289:06:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
253:06:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
64:12:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
560:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
265:Academics and educators
543:Pharaoh of the Wizards
166:edits since nomination
467:. This is a case for
82:Articles for deletion
370:
350:
291:
287:
251:
99:Guide to deletion
89:How to contribute
578:
422:
328:deletion sorting
318:
312:
307:
284:
279:
277:
261:deletion sorting
248:
243:
241:
230:
229:
215:
159:
141:
79:
61:
56:
34:
586:
585:
581:
580:
579:
577:
576:
575:
574:
568:deletion review
420:
376:His works have
316:
308:
303:
282:
275:Thebiguglyalien
273:
246:
239:Thebiguglyalien
237:
172:
132:
116:
113:
76:
73:
59:
54:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
584:
582:
573:
572:
554:
553:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
530:
529:
528:
503:David Eppstein
473:David Eppstein
444:
432:
413:
403:David Eppstein
396:
371:
351:
323:
292:
233:
232:
169:
112:
111:
106:
96:
91:
74:
72:
67:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
583:
571:
569:
565:
561:
556:
555:
552:
548:
544:
540:
537:
527:
523:
519:
514:
513:
512:
508:
504:
499:
498:
497:
493:
489:
484:
483:
482:
478:
474:
470:
466:
462:
461:
460:
456:
452:
448:
445:
443:
440:
436:
433:
431:
427:
423:
417:
414:
412:
408:
404:
400:
397:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
372:
369:
365:
361:
357:
352:
349:
345:
341:
337:
333:
329:
324:
322:
319:
313:
311:
306:
300:
296:
293:
290:
285:
278:
276:
270:
266:
262:
257:
256:
255:
254:
249:
242:
240:
228:
224:
221:
218:
214:
210:
206:
203:
200:
197:
194:
191:
188:
185:
182:
178:
175:
174:Find sources:
170:
167:
163:
157:
153:
149:
145:
140:
136:
131:
127:
123:
119:
115:
114:
110:
107:
104:
100:
97:
95:
92:
90:
87:
86:
85:
83:
78:
71:
68:
66:
65:
62:
57:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
559:
557:
538:
446:
434:
415:
398:
381:
373:
309:
304:
299:WP:NACADEMIC
294:
274:
238:
234:
222:
216:
208:
201:
195:
189:
183:
173:
75:
49:
47:
31:
28:
199:free images
564:talk page
518:Multi7001
488:Multi7001
451:Multi7001
269:Computing
118:Jack Lutz
70:Jack Lutz
37:talk page
566:or in a
360:TJMSmith
340:TJMSmith
162:View log
103:glossary
39:or in a
469:WP:PROF
447:Comment
310:Dameron
205:WP refs
193:scholar
135:protect
130:history
80:New to
465:WP:GNG
439:hroest
336:Kansas
177:Google
139:delete
60:plicit
386:DFlhb
220:JSTOR
181:books
156:views
148:watch
144:links
16:<
547:talk
539:Keep
522:talk
507:talk
492:talk
477:talk
455:talk
435:Keep
426:talk
421:Mvqr
416:Keep
407:talk
399:Keep
390:talk
374:Keep
364:talk
344:talk
334:and
332:Iowa
317:talk
305:Popo
295:Keep
283:talk
267:and
247:talk
213:FENS
187:news
152:logs
126:talk
122:edit
50:keep
227:TWL
160:– (
549:)
524:)
509:)
494:)
479:)
457:)
428:)
409:)
392:)
366:)
358:.
346:)
338:.
301:.
271:.
207:)
164:|
154:|
150:|
146:|
142:|
137:|
133:|
128:|
124:|
52:.
545:(
520:(
505:(
490:(
475:(
453:(
424:(
405:(
388:(
362:(
342:(
314:
286:)
280:(
250:)
244:(
231:)
223:·
217:·
209:·
202:·
196:·
190:·
184:·
179:(
171:(
168:)
158:)
120:(
105:)
101:(
55:✗
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.