Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vaidyanathan Ramaswami (3rd nomination)

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. Stifle (talk) 08:35, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vaidyanathan Ramaswami (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)

I spent some time cleaning up this aticle, and now that is is clean, it is very thin indeed. After removing links to his daughter's bio, text about where his successful kids work, and lot of peacock language, all that is left are a few industry and academic awards. All in all, I'm thinking he does not meet notability requirements. Note that he was an academic for four years, followed by being a Bell labs researcher, and is now an industry researcher. Ah, and now I see that this is the third time around at AfD. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 19:30, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep GS h-index of 32 in computer science passes WP:Prof#C1. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]
• CommentXxanthippe, just a note to say that WP:Prof#C1 specifically says that h-indexes are of "limited usefulness in evaluating whether Criterion 1 is satisfied", and that "They should be approached with caution because their validity is not, at present, completely accepted..." HappyValleyEditor (talk) 08:23, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. The subject has authored a number of highly-cited works, so I think WP:PROF#C1 applies. However, the entire article is uncited WP:RESUME. With the exception of the "Distinguished Alumni Award" from Purdue, none of the article is referenced to reliable secondary sources. It seems like a rather absurd suggestion to reduce the article to the BLP-complaint single sentence: "In 2011, Vaidyanathan Ramaswami was named a Distinguished Science Alumnus by Purdue University". Sławomir
  Biały 17:32, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If the BLP is WP:RESUME then edit it to improve. Don't delete it. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:30, 1 April 2016 (UTC).[reply]

As I said, the article would then read "In 2011, Vaidyanathan Ramaswami was named a Distinguished Science Alumnus by Purdue University." That doesn't seem like a basis for an encyclopedia article, and is borderline A7. Sławomir
Biały 14:10, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete. I think he does pass WP:PROF#C1 (fwiw, it was a little tricky to get a Google scholar search that would list all his pubs and not be confused with other people with similar names — here's what I used). The problem is that other than the alumni award we have essentially no sources. I can find enough online to convince myself that the basic facts of his education and employment history are valid, but they're low-quality sources and provide no other details. I think that's too little to use as the basis for a biography here. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:47, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as still questionably better for any improvements, best deleted and restarted if better later. SwisterTwister talk 19:56, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment / Move to draft - I myself, am not a fan for deletion. This article does need much work for it to be suitable for the main-space, and needs to have the formatting fixed and references fixed, with additional references. Instead of deletion, how about moving it into draft stage, and having the user submit it via AfC? If it is not majority agreed on to move it to draft stage, I would say delete. Cheers, and best of luck. CookieMonster755 ^(talk) 18:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment given the original condition of the article (Bloated with details on his children's successes, COI and POV problems), I don't see how working with the user would help any. Check especially the low-quality references used by the article creator. The life section use to have this text, replete with references for the kids' biographies: "Their immediate family members are: daughter Dr. Priya Baraniak (Rooster Bio Inc.), son Prem Ramaswami (Google), son-in-law Dr. Andrew Baraniak (Independent Patent Agent) and daughter-in-law Shruti Ramaswami (TechSoup). The Ramaswamis have three grandchildren: Kiran, Sahana and Veer-Krishna." I think this is likely an attempt by the children or a friend to memorialize the article subject's career. If this was someone truly notable, yes let's go the extra mile-- but that's not the case here. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 21:09, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Per HappyValleyEditor's comment. CookieMonster755 ^(talk) 22:28, 18 April 2016 (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.