Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mahinda Pathegama (2nd 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 Delete and salt. --MelanieN (talk) 01:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mahinda Pathegama

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

I declined CSD G7 on this article as it is probably no longer eligible under that guideline. A previous version of this article was deleted at AfD, however, I do not believe CSD G4 is entirely applicable either. Therefore, I am taking back into AfD and invoking the argument from that AfD, that he does not satisfy WP:PROF. Safiel (talk) 17:49, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:18, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:50, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:50, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:50, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ ~~He has the same birth date as Einstein!~~ Delete. Pathegama has a GS profile, showing his works have been cited a bit more than last time this was up for AfD. However, the grand total (95 citations) and h-index (3) are miles below what we usually take as indicating notability at academics AfDs. There's a ton of links in the article, which is one of the most drummed-up puff pieces I have seen in a long time. Perhaps some of those links would make him pass GNG, but, frankly, there's too much to go through and the article is so bad, that even in the unlikely case that he meets GNG, WP:TNT applies. --Randykitty (talk) 09:13, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Actually, that GS profile seems to suffer from the same puffery as this article... The most-cited article (51 hits) actually does not even list Pathegama as an author! That leaves a total of 44 citations and an h-index of 2. Given this pattern, I think we should salt this. --Randykitty (talk) 09:20, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per Randykitty's findings of false entries (there is more than one) on the Google scholar profile, I don't think it's appropriate in this case to consider sources affiliated with the subject to be reliable (as we often do for purely factual material concerning subjects of biographies). In any case the student prizes and committee memberships listed don't add up to notability. The article creator has also tried to blank the old AfD notice from the article's talk page [1]; I strongly suspect an autobiography, so page protection after this repeated recreation would probably be a good idea. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:35, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Barnes and Noble, 2010, "Sri Lankan Scientists", General Books LLC, ISBN 9781157343691 : There is no book by this ISBN:

Most of the references are from local news paper articles and has no "scientific" validity.

Google scholar site for the : https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=mxuxRAcAAAAJ&hl=en has many articles not authored/co-authored by the person. And counts only 35+ citations, clearly indicating that it fails the notability criteria. You may consider the previous 3 deletions of the same article.

There is no scientific articles cited in the wiki: listed below >

=Use of thermal imaging techniques in identifying target object characteristics =Remote system for microscopic cell analysis =Quantitative recognition of feature morphogenesis of SARS-CoV in diagnostic electron microscopy =Remote analysis of morphological features in diagnostic electron microscopy of SARS-CoV =Remote System for microscopic cell analysis =Biological cell interaction process due to electromagnetic radiation =Given the scale of population demographic shift, what are the practicalities of applying knowledge in a meaningful way for an ageing population? =Automated Sports-Talents Identification System and the establishment of National Sports Surveillance

this citation ( Division of IT, engineering and the environment, BEng Electrical & Mechatronics Engineering Graduates, University of South Australia, [16] Retrieved 22.04.2001) just links the university website.

This citation (University of Moratuwa, Alumni, [17] Retrieved 19.12.2001) just links the university website.
duplicate citations: 1,22,36,92: 9,60: 21,84:
many of the citations has no links to back up, just text.
The breakthrough said to have been made by the wiki "Frequency-forced Digital Processing" is nowhere to be found online or in scientific articles. Clearly a topic without scientific basis.
Citation "Creating Future Scientists Program, 'Profile of Scientist Mahinda Pathegama', 2015. [40] Retrieved 28.02.2015" refers to his own website. COI
CItation "http://www.yatedo.fr/p/Mahinda+pathegama/famous/6ca706f6a16ccaa786ca3e202b366fdf" is an article appeared everywhere online shows some similarity to the wiki indicating some COI.
The official website has nothing scientific but reiterating and re-directing to NASA website to which the person in wiki has no connection to.Surani Alwis (talk) 00:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Highly promotional article for non-notable academic. `DGG (at NYPL) -- reply here 19:57, 12 April 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.