Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tuan Le (Computer Scientist)

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 Delete. Michig (talk) 07:16, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tuan Le (Computer Scientist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Receiving best paper award at a single scientific conference is not notability. I do not consider that even a credible assertion of significance. I would have deleted this as speedy A7, but the speedy tag was removed before I got to it. As far as I can tell, he still has not received his doctorate. DGG ( talk ) 03:28, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I personally believe the page should not be deleted because Tuan Le is a formidable force of nature in delay tolerant networking. His accomplishments are profound, especially considering his young age. In my opinion he is notable enough to justify having his own page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.161.105.8 (talk) 03:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC) — 75.161.105.8 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Delete Does not meet general notability guidelines or notability for academics, award is relatively minor --CutOffTies (talk) 03:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• As a DTN researcher I strongly urge you to reconsider. Tuan has made numerous fundamental contributions to community based routing as applied to DTN. In the community he is know as the Claude Shannon of Community Networking. Mull over that for a second , please. HayastanRepublicanGuard (talk) 04:09, 22 June 2015 (UTC) — HayastanRepublicanGuard (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

• Mulled over Still say Delete --CutOffTies (talk) 05:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I personally believe the article should stay. Tuan is very young, but he is a titan in our field and his body of work constitutes notoriety, in my opinion. I previously worked with Tuan and, though I was fired, having nothing but utmost respect for his achievements. GanapathyONDABEAT (talk) 04:14, 22 June 2015 (UTC) — GanapathyONDABEAT (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Strong Delete There is nothing on this page that even remotely suggestions Wikipedia-level notability at the moment. The 10 papers are self published sources, which begs the question why a csd deletion on promotional grounds was not entertained in this case, and the only other remaining citation in his article at the time of this publication notes that he went to conference alleged to be notable but lacking substance, a fatal flaw for any article here since content apart from context is meaningless. Frankly, I've read obituaries that contained more information than this article, although I will concede that this second attempt to create an article on an at the moment unnotable collage student is a massive improvement over the original article, which was located at Tuan Le (Student) and was deleted on A7 grounds. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:38, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sir, ICNC is aa top tier conference in networks. From their website "International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communication (ICNC), technically co-sponsored by IEEE Computer Society and IEEE Communications Society, financially sponsored by Technology Innovation Association, is a PREMIER conference in the computer and communications fields. ICNC 2015 is to be held in Anaheim, California, USA, during Feb. 16-19, 2015." It is unprecdented for a Ph.d student to win best paper award at such an esteemed conference(30% acceptance rate). Frankly I find your dismissal of Mr. Le's accomplishments both ignorant and condescending. HayastanRepublicanGuard (talk) 05:51, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I personally agree with Hayastan Guard (Ayo!). It is foolish and misguided to assert that a man who, having published the best paper at a PREMIER conference, is not notorious enough to justify a page on a 3rd rate encyclopedia. I can personally vouch for his formidable achievements. GanapathyONDABEAT (talk) 05:57, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • @HayastanRepublicanGuard and GanapathyONDABEAT: You have my apologies for any perceived personal attack but my comments stand: From where I sit, according to Wikipedia's standard for notability, your doctor in training isn't there yet. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• KEEP I am not in the field of computer networking, but I have a technical background. Even I think this page is not a glitch. Basically, I do not understand what all are you saying, as the achievements of this man are clearly enough for notoriety. I bet ten lakhs that other computer networking researchers would agree. Though he does not have PHD degree yet, he is a highly respected member of the community. It is not required to have a PHD degree to be a successful and well known researcher. Glitch glitch11 (talk) 06:08, 22 June 2015 (UTC) — Glitch glitch11 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• ADMINS BE ADVISE WE MAY HAVE A SOCK: Both HayastanRepublicanGuard (talk · contribs) and GanapathyONDABEAT (talk · contribs) are fairly new accounts concerned only with this article and this deletion discussion. Both also share a few other traits of similarity, including the absence of userpages, a failure to indent comments, and tendency to back each other up; the latter account also made a previous attempt at creating this article at Tuan Le (Student). There is presently insufficient evidence to make a conclusive case for socking here, however I urge the participants here to keep a watchful eye out on this discussion; if more new-ish accounts emerge or isp editors suddenly take a keen interest in this discussion it may warrant SPI-related action. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:13, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Per the SPI, I have struck all comments from sockpuppets. Be aware that the first comment from IP 75.161.105.8 may be from the same user. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 01:49, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I still believe it should have been speedied as an A7, but clearly fails WP:GNG and WP:NPROF. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:25, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• KEEP I believe that because there is no clear consensus, the article should be kept as is. I see no reason to delete it, as Tuan Le is one of the true fathers of the field of Delay Tolerant Networking. Augia. Glitch glitch11 (talk) 01:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Striking this !vote as user has already !voted above, one account = one !vote, that is the rule. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:13, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Also of note is the fact that the article on Tuan Le has never been challenged, yet he is not a notorious figure. While the father of socially-aware delay tolerant networkings page is under question, which is a shame. Glitch glitch11 (talk) 03:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Instead of complaining about other articles or adding puffery to the article, you should make policy and guideline-based arguments that he meets the notability guidelines for academics or general notability guidelines. In answer to your question about the poker player, winning two World Series of Poker bracelets and two World Poker Tour titles clearly establishes his claim towards notability. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:TOOSOON. His articles are too recently published to have significant publications, so WP:PROF#C1 seems out of reach, and there is no evidence of passing any of the other WP:PROF criteria. Certainly a best-paper award is not enough by itself. In addition, most of his publications are with a single more-notable co-author, Gerla, so even if they were highly cited it would be difficult to disentangle their contributions and determine how much of their notability should reflect on the subject. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Nice CV. Smart guy. But a grad student who, according to the link in the article, just passed quals a month ago is highly unlikely to be notable. No evidence that he passes the criteria for academics. WP:TOOSOON. Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:27, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A7 would probably have been appropriate. Anyway, fails WP:GNG (couldn't find significant coverage) and WP:TOOSOON. APerson (talk!) 03:59, 29 June 2015 (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.