- 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) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 20:14, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Vaclav Zizler (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)
does not meet notability criteria in WP:GNG and also does not meet WP:ACADEMIC --MATThematical (talk) 18:25, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Google scholar (for author:v-zizler) shows citation counts of 923, 229, 160, 144, 131, etc. For a low-citation subject (pure mathematics), this is a lot, enough I think to pass WP:PROF#C1. He also has multiple books with multiple in-depth published reviews, possibly enough for WP:AUTHOR, and the article (which has been significantly improved since nomination) now also includes a national award of unclear significance. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:35, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:35, 23 May 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.