Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Pinsky

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 keep. (non-admin closure) f e minist 02:42, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Pinsky

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

Fails WP:NPROF, as tagged since August 2008. The book sources were all written by Mark Pinsky himself, and do not establish notability. Also, [1], a page about the professor, does not establish notability either. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:58, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as per nom Dkoenig9352 (talk) 01:07, 10 May 2017 (UTC) — Dkoenig9352 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 03:59, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 03:59, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:12, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As a fellow of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics, list here, selectivity criteria here, satisfies WP:NPROF #3, I think. Smmurphy^(Talk) 12:41, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. To add to what Smmurphy found, he published 2 books through AMS and his research record shows HI around 30. It seems he passes according to several different criteria in PROF. Save others eds' time and please close this. Agricola44 (talk) 14:44, 10 May 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Weak Keep I didn't know that simply being a fellow makes an academic encyclopedically notable. I guess this guy is notable.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:00, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's actually #3 in WP:PROF The person is...a fellow of a major scholarly society.... IMS is a well-establised society and publishes 5 high-profile journals in this area. Agricola44 (talk) 22:16, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- likely a pass at WP:AUTHOR as well with multiple published books, e.g.:

Partial differential equations and boundary-value problems with applications by Mark A Pinsky ( Book ). 30 editions published between 1988 and 2011 in English and held by 408 WorldCat member libraries worldwide. WorldCat Identities

On the balance of things, "keep" is the way to go. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:09, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:PROF#C1. Nine publications with >100 citations is enough, especially in mathematics, a low-citation subject. Usually for #C3 we consider bigger academic societies like AMS or ASA, but I think the IMS Fellowship is also suggestive. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:27, 13 May 2017 (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.