Deletion of Daniel Fessler

Comment: The article is certainly poor (I just cleaned it a bit), but I think the subject is notable according to  #1. Specifically, WoS shows 34 research papers with h-index=11. Some might judge this borderline, however, the ''collective'' number of citations well exceeds 300 and I believe this clinches. Respectfully
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: He has one quite well cited paper (180 cites in Google scholar), but the depth of strong papers is a bit less than I'd like to see for a pass of  #1. And he is editor-in-chief of a journal from a major publisher that's been published since 1997, but one of four editors-in-chief of that journal. So I think there's a weak pass of both criteria #1 and #8. The length and sourcing of the article are not great, but what's there is adequately sourced
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)