Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dag Sjøberg

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) — MarkH₂₁^talk 17:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dag Sjøberg

[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)

Previously deleted page with nothing major improvements. Fails GNG Sanketio31 (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sanketio31 (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:48, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:48, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The previously deleted version was speedy-deleted in 2005 and was pure porn-site spam unrelated to Sjøberg. So we have to evaluate the article freshly rather than relying on any past discussion. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 00:26, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 00:26, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 00:27, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. These are the Scopus metrics for Dr. Sjøberg and all 112 of his coauthors with > 10 papers:

Total citations: avg: 2233, med: 1414, Sjøberg: 4110

Total papers: avg: 98, med: 91, S: 78.

h-index: avg: 20, med: 19, S: 32.

Top 5 citations: 1st: avg: 369, med: 204, S: 424. 2nd: avg: 217, med: 125, S: 245. 3rd: avg: 145, med: 106, S: 227. 4th: avg: 117, med: 81, S: 223. 5th: avg: 98, med: 67, S: 218.

Seems to be quite a bit above average across the board. JoelleJay (talk) 00:27, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I'm surprised at how little I can find beyond the citation record — basically just a faculty profile and a couple of interviews giving his opinions on some technical subjects [1] [2]. But the citation record should be good enough for WP:PROF#C1, even in a high-citation field like CS. His political activity doesn't seem to pass WP:NPOL but that shouldn't take away from notability in an unrelated area. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:53, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, with these citations he is a notable academic.--Mvqr (talk) 10:19, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, his citation rates reasonably high for a computer scientist in his field of software engineering (which is very different from deep learning where citation rates are much much higher). --hroest 14:38, 19 April 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.