Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radim Rehurek

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) 13:25, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Radim Rehurek

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

Subject does not appear to meet the requirements of WP:ACADEMIC. Also, see this essay about posting CVs. KDS4444^Talk 09:07, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The Scopus Young Researcher Award is the only fact that counts towards meeting WP:ACADEMIC, and I'm not convinced it's the kind of "highly prestigious academic award" intended there. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 10:36, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Actually, the original intention for me to create the article was that Radim Rehurek is the creator of Gensim, a widely used topic modeling toolkit both in academy and in industry containing scalable implementations of many natural language processing (like LSA LDA HDP) and deep learning (like word2vec doc2vec) algorithms, instead of the Scopus Young Researcher Award which is just an adjunct I find during completing the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Velvel2 (talk • contribs) 11:42, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The software itself may well be notable (looks borderline to me), but that doesn't make its author notable. All of the citations, even the newly added ones, are to works written by Rehurek; nothing independent. Links to Rehurek's website and LinkedIn profile make this look like CV puffery. Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep. As an analogy or an example, Matei Zaharia is also mainly known for his notable software Apache Spark. Velvel2 (talk) 16:46, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Velvel2, please only make one "keep" or "delete" comment. I have struck your second one. And the usual word is "keep", not "defend". —David Eppstein (talk) 22:32, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was ashamed to use the word "keep" since I know the notability of Radim Rehurek is weak. Velvel2 (talk) 04:51, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not enough cites for WP:PROF#C1 and what else is there? WP:TOOSOON to have accumulated academic notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:31, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep. I have added some independent reliable sources and removed something like CV puffery. Velvel2 (talk) 05:32, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As David Eppstein suggested above, you are limited to one keep or delete vote. You may make additional on-topic comments in an afd, but repeat votes will be struck.Dialectric (talk) 23:58, 2 February 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.