Deletion of Achillefs Tzioufas

Comment: GS cites for this person's work are miles below the standard needed to pass rof#C1. If the subject's proof is so wonderful, the citations will show it in the course of time. We can wait
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)

Comment: No indication of being |academically notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Subject clearly does not satisfy  or . Criterion 1 must be verified with reliable, independent sources, and I quote from  'Academics/professors meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources are notable.' The subjects own paper is not sufficient. Further explanation is given, and I quote from  'In this case it is necessary to explicitly demonstrate, by a substantial number of references to academic publications of researchers other than the person in question, that this contribution is indeed widely considered to be significant and is widely attributed to the person in question.' In this case there are NO other references that mention the subjects work. I reviewed the article on AfC, and provided further explanation when the editor left a question on my talk page. The lack of notability was also explained to the editor when they left a question at . The editor has also tried to rewrite the notability requirements, removing the clause that I have quoted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ACADEMIC||WP:GNG||WP:ACADEMIC||WP:ACADEMIC||WP:AFCHD)

Comment: The creator of this article has been actively adding related material to the articles Contact process (mathematics) and List of unsolved problems in mathematics.  It would be beneficial if someone had a non-template-based discussion with them about the purpose of Wikipedia and our standards.  (And probably also 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)