Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Andrew Roth

Fails WP:PROF. No third party references. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 04:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete An associate professor of mathematics does not seem very notable. Let him do some more stuff before writing an article on him. Redddogg (talk) 06:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He works in algebraic geometry, which is perhaps the toughest area of pure math in terms of obtaining new results and where people do not publish a lot. I checked MathSciNet and he has 7 papers listed there (which does seem to be a bit low even for algebraic geometry). Two of them are in top-notch journals: one in Inventiones Mathematicae [1] and one in Crelle's Journal [2] That's very good but, in the absence of additional evidence, not good enough for passing WP:PROF. Citation hits, both in googlescholar and in mathscinet, are pretty low and neither the WP article nor his webpage give any other information (such as honors/awards, journal editorships, etc) that might indicate passing WP:PROF. Nsk92 (talk) 11:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]