Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ramanathan V. Guha: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
(9 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. '' |
|||
<!-- |
|||
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> |
|||
The result of the debate was cleanup. [[User:Johnleemk|Johnleemk]] | [[User talk:Johnleemk|Talk]] 12:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
===[[Ramanathan V. Guha]]=== |
===[[Ramanathan V. Guha]]=== |
||
Errr...is this guy really that notable? Article reads more like a resume cover letter and doesn't seem, to me, to establish notability. [[User:Aeverett|Wrathchild]] 14:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC) |
Errr...is this guy really that notable? Article reads more like a resume cover letter and doesn't seem, to me, to establish notability. [[User:Aeverett|Wrathchild]] 14:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
* '''Comment''' - If he really co-founded Epinions then he has at least a claim to notability. Agreed that the article reads like a (badly written) CV, however. --[[User:Kingboyk|kingboyk]] 17:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Cleanup''' I don't want to have to read a c.v. to try to understand why this person is notable. If it can't be stated clearly in a sentence then it should go. -- [[User:(aeropagitica)|(aeropagitica)]] 21:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Cleanup''' - He's a well-known computer scientist in knowledge representation and artificial intelligence circles, and is one of the creators of the [[Resource Description Framework]] that is the basis for a lot of [[Semantic Web]] work. I think that makes him notable, though I agree the article could be cleaned up. -- [[User:Chris Hanson|cmh]] 03:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Abstain''': Is he notable to he here? And surnames ending with "Guha", which is a surname used in [[Bengal]] normally has no convention to write names like Ramanathan V. Guha (I mean names are written in full) - though exceptions my be there, of course. Full name shall be appreciated. I would invite more comments as regards the notability. --[[User:Bhadani|Bhadani]] 06:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
** I think he's notable because many of the projects he has lead or made significant contributions to — not just Epinions, but the [[Cyc]] project, and the [[Resource Description Framework]] and [[Semantic Web]] — are well-known enough within the computer industry to make him an "industry figure." On the subject of naming, he is often cited in the computer industry press and computer science academia as "R. V. Guha" and is otherwise referred to within the English-language portion of the industry via an "anglicized" name, as in the entry's title. This might be important for discoverability and linkability, though there could always be redirects to his proper or preferred form (whatever it may be). -- [[User:Chris Hanson|cmh]] 07:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Cleanup''' - As indicated already, how can you question the noteworthiness of the create of RDF the basic foundation of the next generation of the Web. This is quite ironic where you also factor in the role that Wikipedia will ultimately play in the materialization of the Semantic Web vision (Wikipedia will soon become the Semantic / Data Web Poster child). I understand that outlines without the "Stub" notice can be misleading re. encyclopedic pages (I've been burnt by this myself across Wikipedia already), but we cannot have a true encyclopedia without its prime responsibility of knowledge creation and exposure compromised by inadvertent distortions. To remove this entry from Wikipedia is to distort extremely valuable history! I don't think this is anyone's intention.--[[User:KingsleyIdehen|Kingsley_Idehen]] 22:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div> |