Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aleksandar Jurišić

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. Fails to meet

WP:PROF. Given this is a BLP, this deletion not preclude the possibility of this article being recreated in future should the individual meet any of the requirements of that guideline. Seddon ^talk 08:24, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Aleksandar Jurišić

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I couldn't establish that he meets

CAT:NN for 12 years, so hopefully we can resolve it now. Boleyn (talk) 08:05, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep. Article is a stub, but a simple Google search reveals he meets criteria - currently he is a Full Prof., head of a lab, member of editorial board for
Ars mathematica contemporanea, has impact outside academia (works with Def Min),... Regards, Klemen Kocjancic (talk) 08:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think when the NN tag was placed in 2009 he was certainly non-notable, but now he is a full professor at a major university in Slovenia. A solid keep. scope_creep^Talk 14:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Neither of the above "keep" votes are based on policy: none of being a full professor, being head of a lab, or being a member of an editorial board of a minor journal are valid rationales for keeping an article. (Instead, we have related but stronger criteria: someone at a distinguished professor title, or something like that that is a clear step above full professor, someone who heads an entire university, or someone who is editor-in-chief of a major journal, are notable.) We also do not have the citation record necessary to demonstrate a pass of
WP:PROF#C1, and there is no evidence of any other WP:PROF or other notability criterion. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete. Neither the article nor the two votes above make any argument that any of the criteria of
WP:NPROF is fulfilled, a search on GS indicates that he likely fails NPROF#1 due to low citations. --hroest 15:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete. Not seeing a C1 pass here, but maybe another combinatorics professor in Slovenia would have a better gauge of impact... JoelleJay (talk) 18:24, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Since I was mentioned, I'll say that I'm not seeing much of a hidden case for notability that others have missed. I agree that full prof, head of a lab, and membership on an editorial board (short of editor in chief) fail the average professor test of
WP:NPROF. He's mentioned in a Delo (newspaper) article [1] in the context of a successful class contest to decode a WWI-era note. I'm doubtful that the article is enough upon which to hang notability, however. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 19:22, 1 September 2021 (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.