Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subi Jacob George

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 keep. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:29, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Subi Jacob George

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

Subject does not appear to meet relevant notability guidelines and lacks non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources. Steps were taken to locate sources WP:BEFORE this nomination, but were not successful. Saqib (talk) 19:16, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As per the latest revision,The article has relevant notability which includes gov. and sources from US patent numbers and Authority controls and local news and media. Stalin Sunny^Talk2Me 02:59, 11 May 2018 (UTC) This user is creator of the page[reply]

Removed disruptive header. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:15, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Week Keep: May or may not "squeeze by" (I dislike that term) WP:GNG but certainly WP:PROF as a co-author and contributor to peer-reviewed scientific journals as an expert (a doctor) in the field. Otr500 (talk) 01:12, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:52, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Two high cited papers on GS but seemingly little else. Not remotely as pass of WP:Prof. WP:Too soon.Xxanthippe (talk) 03:09, 25 May 2018 (UTC). [reply]
Strong keep clear pass of WP:Prof per Eppstein below. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:36, 31 May 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:58, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. His Google scholar profile shows 17 of his papers having over 100 citations, and an h-index of 44, well above threshold for WP:PROF#C1. Xxanthippe, where are you seeing only two highly-cited papers? —David Eppstein (talk) 05:12, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vote changed. Where did I go wrong? Xxanthippe (talk) 06:36, 31 May 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Keep as per David Eppstein.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:07, 31 May 2018 (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.