Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theo Wallimann

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. Sandstein 18:05, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Theo Wallimann (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)

Creator of the article has requested this be deleted. They also indicate that they hired the account paid to edit this article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:37, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Wallimann appears not to have a Google Scholar profile, but according to Publons, he has an h-index of 68 and 16,670 citations overall [1]. 38 of his 248 publications are in the triple-digit range for citations. We'd generally take this as passing WP:PROF#C1. XOR'easter (talk) 20:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Wallimann's citation record looks to be a pass of WP:NPROF C1, and this is backed up by the Vogt Prize. The article could use a few more citations, but otherwise appears to be a respectable stub. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 13:14, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Basically all the text is by the creating account User:LarsCedric which has requested deletion by email. No opinion beyond that of if it should be developed and kept or not. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:13, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per PROF. Be careful what you pay for, as Gordon Sondland knows. Bearian (talk) 20:42, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep - A google search indicates he has in-depth significant coverage in reliable press. Celestina007 (talk) 21:46, 23 November 2019 (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.