Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jotun Hein
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:46, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Seems rather unnotable from content of article, his website lists a lot of papers he has contributed to... does this make him worthy of includsion? --TimPope 09:29, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable other than contributing to several academic articles. --TimPope 11:07, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: name gets 5180 Googles, A word of warning, however, be careful not to word your nomination as if you are unsure or are asking for opinions, in the past some people have gotten in trouble for doing this over a prolonged period of time. You are supposed to clearly show that your own mind is made up on the matter. Other than that, a Keep is probably in order, but I know nothing about this subject so will abstain for now (and probably for the entire course of the Vfd as well). Master Thief Garrett 10:51, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: you might get into trouble if you do it very very often over a prolonged period of time, enough that people suspect you of not having good faith and trying to prove a WP:POINT. Just because one person got in trouble in extreme circumstances doesn't mean it should become a permanent taboo. Kappa 12:59, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- True, but someone is bound to jump on it in a controversial Vfd like a school--"nominator doesn't even make up his own mind, WP:POINT!"--if you lose focus at the wrong moment. Master Thief Garrett 13:24, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: you might get into trouble if you do it very very often over a prolonged period of time, enough that people suspect you of not having good faith and trying to prove a WP:POINT. Just because one person got in trouble in extreme circumstances doesn't mean it should become a permanent taboo. Kappa 12:59, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nobody has voted yet so here is one vote... I don't know for sure whether or not Jotun Hein is notable enough, but the article does not establish notability. However, I'll keep an eye on this one and reconsider if the article is expanded.Sjakkalle 14:25, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]- OK, keep the expanded rewrite because he has co-authored a textbook, but I want to point out that publishing things and doing lots of research isn't really something which makes a professor more notable than the "average" college professor. All professors have published something. Sjakkalle 07:46, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I'll expand it. JuntungWu 15:39, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Helped write a book which got the following reviews: 'an excellent and timely book that should appeal to a variety of people in genetics and applied mathematics.' -Professor Montgomery Slatkin (Berkeley) 'the authors are outstanding experts in the field, and the book is topical and timely.' -Professor David Balding (Imperial College) 'Hein, Schierup and Wiuf have written the first general book on the coalescent. It is an engaging combination of clear mathematical derivation and real data examples.' -Professor Joe Felsenstein (University of Washington) I'm not an expert (or even a novice) in the subject, but I think he's notable.- Scimitar
- Keep per Scimitar. — RJH 16:23, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and expand. Ocford professor who appears to have done significant research in mathematics. Capitalistroadster 20:52, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and expand. Published professor. Megan1967 06:50, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.