Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A. P. Balachandran

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 (closed by non-admin). RMHED (talk) 22:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A. P. Balachandran

A. P. Balachandran (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Notability not asserted and I couldn't find anything on Google that made me think this person needs an article. User:Gulmammad looks like he has rv a request for speedy delete. Cutler (talk) 08:40, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Author of several academic books and essays. See http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&ned=us&q=%22A.+P.+Balachandran%22&sa=N&tab=np (Mind meal (talk) 11:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC))
  • Comment - academic publications on their own don't necessarily meet Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Cutler (talk) 14:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:40, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, well-cited author, 8 papers with over 100 cites in Google Scholar. Named chair, fellow of APS (both of which I added to the article after checking his listing in his department's faculty directory). —David Eppstein (talk) 16:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • P.S. I added another source that says that he played a crucial role in the introduction of topological ideas in quantum physics. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Even before David fixed it up it was never remotely a deletion. Widely cited publications and books and the consequent academic positions are what make scholars notable. GS should have been enough to prevent this nomination. FWIW, though, his home page is very uncommunicative--and so was the original article. DGG (talk) 04:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, I think currently there is enough information in the article about A.P. Balachandran to see how much his works are important for physics. Gulmammad (talk) 23:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

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.