Deletion of Walter Dewitte

Comment: Even though he appears to pass #C1, the criterion also states that it has to be "substantiated through |reliable sources", meaning more than one independent reference. Also the rof#Citation metrics|Citation metrics section states that "Measures of citability such as H-index, G-index, etc, may be used as a rough guide in evaluating whether Criterion 1 is satisfied, but they should be approached with considerable caution". Hence I am a bit reluctant to agree on a clear pass based sololy on one not entirely reliable source, and also there are no further significant claims of anything notable, eg awards, invited conference papers, prestigious grants etc. It would help if his high citation index can be referenced in the article and clearly stating the resulting impact of it not just in number terms. As the article stands now, it needs more sources, as it fails  with no claims of notability that are supported by mulitple independent references
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:RS||WP:P||WP:N)

Comment: Clear pass of rof#C1 with GS cites of 334, 228, 224, 88, 76... h index = 18. Nominator should read, mark, learn and inwardly digest rof before making further nominations of academics
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P||WP:P)

Comment: I think this is one of those cases where relying only on h-index is not a good idea. Dewitte works in a field with fairly high publication speeds and citation rates. For such a field the h-index of 18 is pretty good but is not yet, IMO, in the region establishing unquestionable notability. Most of his papers with high citations in GoogleScholar are papers with a significant number of co-authors. The one exception appears to be this paperhttp://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.arplant.54.031902.134836 with James Murray, who according to the article's text, was his supervisor at Cambridge (the article says  "He carried out this work at the University of Cambridge, United Kingdom under the guidance of Professor Jim Murray"). In such cases I try to look for some secondary indicators of notability - such as giving plenary talks at important conferences, getting substantial grants, awards, journal editorships etc. I just could not find any of that here, not even significant evidence of giving invited hour talks. His position at Cardiff as "Senior Research Associate" appears to be a non-permanent position to me, presumably funded by some-one's grant. I could not find his CV or information about his educational background (e.g. when and where he received his PhD). Under such circumstances I do not think that the citability data in googlescholar carries enough weight to pass 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)