Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hung Nguyen (scientist)

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 delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:26, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hung Nguyen (scientist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

I can find just two references to this individual, both brief [1][2]. Darouet (talk) 20:36, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:56, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:56, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of COVID-19-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:08, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete does not meet our notability guidelines for academics.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:00, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect to the investigation article for now. Otherwise this person is only notable for one thing as only a part of a group. GPinkerton (talk) 03:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A Scopus h-index of 18 is only middling for a field that isn't exactly niche; the lede was copied from his profile page, which is the kind of editing we should stomp out, and the rest is just an incidental mention of him being known for only one thing. I'm not seeing a pass of either specialized or general notability guidelines. XOR'easter (talk) 17:17, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'm assuming this isn't the same person as https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?hl=en&user=UtfdLy0AAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate ? -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • That profile isn't even of a single person; it amalgamates H. Nguyen's with different middle initials. XOR'easter (talk) 15:59, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I have found this mention, and here, but those are passing mentions. No significant coverage. Less Unless (talk) 16:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as others have said, doesn't pass WP:NPROF. -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There’s nothing here, and the subject fails PROF. —Kbabej (talk) 21:37, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Doesn't seem notable enough for an article, and the page does not describe anything noteworthy that proves this person should have an article. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 21:41, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete GNG is not met here Jenyire2 11:51, 9 February 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.