Deletion of John Oommen

Comment: Clearly passes several categories of rof. An ill-researched nomination
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)

Comment: IEEE and IAPR Fellow, passes  #3
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: The IAPR and IEEE Fellowships give him a clear pass of  #3, and he also has an outside case at #5 with the Chancellor's Professorship
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Contra'' Lambiam, we can't base a bio article '''entirely''' on self-published sources (see #Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves #5), but I've added an RS on the IEEE fellowship
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: Persons do not have to satisfy multiple aspects of , one is sufficient. We have  that this person holds a fellow rank in IEEE, which by itself is sufficient for #3, as Nsk92 and David point out. I think we can end the debate on this case. Respectfully
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:RS)

Comment: For the purpose of meeting the academic notability criteria, it is sufficient that they can be substantiated through |reliable sources. The sources in this case are http://people.scs.carleton.ca/~oommen/ the subject's university web pages. These are admittedly not independent, but that is not required: as  states, self-published sources may be used as sources of information '''about themselves''', especially in articles about themselves. &nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:reliable sources)