Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Jason Dominus (3rd nomination)

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. Wifione ^Message 14:17, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mark_Jason_Dominus

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

I looked around. The subject or Kibology doesn't appear to be notable. Checked Google News across all date range. A few mentions, but no major coverage. This person has been nominated for deletion twice in 2005, but the argument provided for notability was lacking in both nomination. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 10:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's quite a bit of coverage of his book Higher Order Perl, coverage which also indicates his importance in Perl. Add to that the other press coverage and it's enough to meet WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR (you might also argue that as an influential computer scientist he gets notability that way). --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:02, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The ridiculous stuff about Chinese and Korean names has been removed and the Kibology bit is irrelevant. Citations have now been added (by Colapeninsula) showing that he and his book are notable in Perl circles, which is probably good enough for WP. Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 12:45, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Contrary to nom's assertion, Kibology is considered notable by Wikipedia; perhaps she should started with Wikipedia when she "looked around". (Disclosure: I am the subject of the article.) —Mark Dominus (talk) 17:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Contrary to the usual etiquette, the nominator has not notified the creator of the article or any of its major contributors of this AfD discussion. She has also not notified WikiProject Perl, which I would have expected. —Mark Dominus (talk) 17:48, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That would have been unusual. You don't know Wilipedia, which is why you ran into issues. --No unique names 16:33, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Worldcat shows his book in almost 400 libraries, with multiple editions. DGG ( talk ) 22:53, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I was going on her Kibology and I was specifically searching for that. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 05:01, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Seems to be a borderline notable WP:AUTHOR and somewhat prominent member of the Perl community. Referencing should be improved and trivialities removed, though. —Ruud 00:59, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lacking claim to notability, also TNT to fix major COI[1]. --No unique names 16:33, 25 October 2012 (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.