Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fernando Pérez (software developer)

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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) –Davey2010^Talk 21:31, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando Pérez (software developer)

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

Sources either are directly related to the subject or only mention him in passing. The only article that directly deals with him is the Infoworld article, but that's basically a interview transcript. Sulfurboy (talk) 04:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Free Software Foundation Announcement is the most relevant article establishing notability of the subject. Until the addition of the page being discussed, the subject was the only historical recipient of the Free Software Award who did not already have a Wikipedia page. In light of this article and the additional secondary sources included, I feel the subject has been shown to meet the WP:NRVE and WP:GNG criteria. Jakevdp (talk) 05:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's always surprising how poorly Wikipedia deals with "notability" issues related to open-source software. The arguments for deletion always seem to relate to lack of "independent" sources and never seem to have much familiarity with how these communities work. Pérez works in academia and develops software widely used there; I think it makes more sense to think in the spirit of WP:PROF. What matters is that his work is widely discussed and highly influential - multiple features in Nature, even! - not that the articles aren't specifically about his life or that they contain interview material. Being worth interviewing is a sign of notability, after all. The Free Software Award really ought to clinch it. But I dunno, I use IPython literally every day and am arguably not "neutral" with regard to scientific computation (that is, I actually know something about it). Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The Berkeley source is in-depth, yes he is part of the institution but they are an organization who can be relied upon to not print fluff. Also here's a Colombian article from his early student days when he won a national award, El Tiempo is the newspaper of reference in Colombia. Vrac (talk) 21:53, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 ^Talk 10:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Using Google Books with "IPython Perez" turns up multiple book citations including a sidebar about Pérez. There is also a nice article in Nature about IPython notebook and Pérez's work in developing it. Meets WP:ACADEMIC #7, substantial impact outside academia in their field. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:14, 9 August 2015 (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.