Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Fisher (technologist)

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 No consensus.

^{Need some help?} 09:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Scott Fisher (technologist)

not-notable vanity. participating in a barely notable project, half of whose members don't have articles, directing another non-notable project that doesn't have an article, and founding a few small non-notable organizations doesn't make you any more notable then a college student who formed a few school clubs in both high school and college Misterdiscreet 05:09, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 06:12, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — promotional; insufficient notability. — ERcheck (talk) 21:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He is chair of the Chair of the Interactive Media Division in the School of Cinema-Television at the University of Southern California, that is, chair of a key department in one of the leading universities in the field. This is the kind of field where someone without a doctorate can be that important. He has been associated with the most prestigious organizations and projects throughout his career. Oddly, its simply an inadequate article--modest articles about researchers tend to get nominated as NN, with the immodest ones nominated as spam.

I've noticed we have difficulty judging articles working in some aspects of computer technology, as their reputation is not primarily based on formal publications. But he does have formal publications: to be exact, he has 52 of them. They are mostly in the most important conference proceedings series, the various IEEE and SPIE proceedings. I'm listing what seem to be recent or important. Most of his work was done before google. There seem to be about 100 print references to his work. I will try to extract the most important of them.

Note that he uses both Scott Fisher and Scott S. Fisher in his work.

01:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)

Keep. Head of department in a top-rated university, fair amount of research - sounds like enough for me. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a list of the departments in this top-rated university:

http://www.usc.edu/directories/departments.html

Where do you see Interactive Media Division? Being a head of some (minor) group within a department does not make you a department head. Stop overstating his importance Misterdiscreet 00:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

delete I don't think this meets
WP:PROF, per Misterdiscreet: contra DGG he's not "chair of a key department", contra Morven he's not "Head of department". Further, arguments based on academic rank don't address whether the subject has accomplished any notable deed beyond that expected in the course of the average academic career. Pete.Hurd 21:08, 3 May 2007 (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.