Deletion of Igor Pak

Comment: A good test of notability is presence in MacTutor. If there is no MacTutor mathematical biography, strong arguments are needed to justify a Keep. Also, please no sockpuppeting in this discussion! Per  and , having written more than 50 research papers is not sufficient proof of notability -- virtually all faculty fall in this class
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:N)

Comment: This is a no-brainer.  I'm a mathematician active in combinatorics.  Pak is an enormously important combinatorialist, who has important publications across different subareas of combinatorics.  I don't have hard data, but he's definitely cited much more than most mathematicians twice his age.  I think he clearly meets the criteria outlined in 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: I'd rather abstain from a more definite opinion but as someone who is somewhat familiar with the research area of Igor Pak, let me make a few (hopefully helpful) comments. I'm concerned about the lack of reliable third-party coverage which would be our only chance to create a thorough article. On the other hand he's clearly an above average mathematician. I've heard his name a number of times (although I share some of his research interests so that might not be so indicative of wider notability) and he's ''definitely'' a productive researcher (very solid list of publications) and a respected authority in his subfield. He's a borderline case of  however because it's difficult to find independent sources that specifically mention him as an ''important'' figure whatever "important" is supposed to mean. The situation looks like this: if we believe that Wikipedia should contain articles for every mathematician who makes solid contributions in his field, a few of which will likely still be remembered in 50 years, then we keep this article. If we believe that Wikipedia should only contain articles for mathematicians whose contributions have been central to the advances in mathematics, who will be regarded in fifty years time as key figures of their (mathematical) time, who are or are almost certain to soon be the primary subject of third-party works, who have garnered various mathematical distinctions, then we should delete this article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: don't think he's notable enough, per  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:N)