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) Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

André Danthine (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)

This subject fails coverage-based WP:BASIC notability guidelines as well as achievement-based criteria at WP:PROFESSOR. JFHJr (㊟) 06:44, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Citations are unimpressive for someone at this level of seniority in a high-citation field, so I can't justify WP:PROF#C1, and there is no evidence of passing any of the other WP:PROF criteria. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I'm not as familiar with his contributions as I am with many other networking people, because i) he's from a generation before me, and ii) a lot of his work was done in areas (X.25, European networking, etc) which I'm not that familiar with. Still, you don't get a SIGCOMM Award (probably the single most prestigious award in the computer networking field - given for "lifetime contribution to the field of communication network[ing]") for nothing. (Actually, that alone ought to establish his notability - we ought to have an article on every winner.) Admittedly, the existing article is a hyper-stub, but there's a longer bio here. I'm reluctant to spend time/energy improving the article if it's just going to be deleted, though. Something useful one could do would be to send a message to the Internet-History mailing list asking their opinion on his importance and contributions; a lot of early networking people (ARPANet builders, etc) are on that list, and will be more familiar with his contributions. The list's archives are open, and permanent, so can be cited in an article, if need be. Plus, he gets 85,000 hits on Google, so he's someone fairly well/widely known. Noel (talk) 03:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep Judging from the bio linked by Noel [1], he should be highly cited (honorary doctorates, SIGCOMM award, etc) but somehow this is not showing up in Google Scholar. I wonder if this is because a lot of his work was done on committees and in engineering design, rather than formally published papers, but I don't know enough about this field to say for sure. Ray^Talk 19:27, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know he did a lot of work on standards committees, etc, and I had previously thought (although I neglected to say so) that that was the reason he hadn't published a lot. (There are other ways to have a big impact on the world than writing papers... :-) Noel (talk) 01:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:16, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Not my field, but it appears that SIGCOMM Award likely satisfies WP:PROF C2. LK (talk) 09:05, 9 January 2013 (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.