List of fellows of IEEE Computer Society: [19] (a possibly incomplete list, according to that page).  May be better suited for a category for the fellows, but as a list it seems rather impractical and not distinctive or selective enough as an award.  Fram ( talk ) 17:41, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Computing .  Fram ( talk ) 17:41, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not versed in list versus category policy but there are 16 already-created equivalent pages (IEEE Fellows grouped by member society, per IEEE custom) gathered at List of IEEE fellows along with some red links, so I was trying to follow the existing pattern.  Turtlecrown ( talk ) 17:51, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  By separating fellows out into groups by sub-organizations within IEEE, providing sortable tables, and giving the reason for each fellow's election, these list articles provide useful structure beyond the category Category:Fellow Members of the IEEE .  All members of these lists are automatically notable by WP:PROF , so I don't think there is a problem with them being indiscriminate.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 17:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hmm, true, it says " which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ", but is a +5000 membership really "highly selective"?  There are about 250 new IEEE fellows every year (all societies combined).  Fram ( talk ) 18:07, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] So?  There are on average more US state legislators elected per year and yet we consider them all notable.  It is not about raw numbers; "a highly selective honor" means one reserved to a small fraction of the total membership.  In the case of IEEE Fellowship, that fraction is that only 0.1% of the total membership (one in every thousand members) can be elected per year, by an in-depth process that involves soliciting detailed letters of recommendation from experts about the proposed fellows' accomplishments.  So yes, it is highly selective.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 19:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You can be elected as Fellow only once, so comparing the yearly addition with the total membership is not accurate.  More than 1% of the membership are fellows actually, 5000+ of 400,000 [20] .  Fram ( talk ) 20:11, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, and that compares favorably with other selective fellowships that are limited to, say, 2% of total membership rather than 0.1%/year.  It is still highly selective.  Only a very small fraction of members will ever achieve that distinction.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 21:19, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to IEEE Computer Society .  We don't need a separate list just to display one person.  Ajf773 ( talk ) 20:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The list is woefully incomplete and should be expanded.  The reason for its incomplete state is that it was barely begun before Fram dragged it here to AfD.  There is far more than one person who could be listed even if we limited it to bluelinks (which the other IEEE society lists do not currently do).  See the other society lists collected at List of IEEE fellows for examples of what this should be.  Also, your merge target makes no sense; we should not single out this one society's fellows for merger there when IEEE has many other societies for which we have well-developed lists of fellows.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 20:40, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I initally thought that all these pages should be tables on their respective pages.  However: IEEE Computer Society was deleted and redirected in 2022 so a merge wouldn't currently be practicable.  As far as I understand (which is not entirely), the fellows are fellows of the IEEE as a whole, not fellows of the society.  They are just internally categorised by society membership.  If this is true, then all these list pages are somewhat of a misnomer.  The IEEE Electronics Packaging Society uses the wording "List of IEEE Fellows in EPS", for example.  So it's unclear if a merge, even if possible, would be quite correct.  Turtlecrown ( talk ) 14:54, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep This is short now, but the nomination itself indicates that it can be expanded, and it provides information in an at-a-glance way that a category can't.  XOR'easter ( talk ) 20:42, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment In some ways the closest analogue to this list is not the ones for the other IEEE societies, but List of fellows of the Association for Computing Machinery .   Which seems to be complete, although it doesn't describe fellows' contributions.  Wasted Time R ( talk ) 10:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : This meets NLIST and likely LISTPEOPLE becaus it is likely that many of the individuals designated fellows are notable.  The list should be expanded, not deleted.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 22:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions .  ミラP @ Miraclepine 23:41, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and expand.  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 23:54, 29 October 2023 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Keep : Passes WP:NLIST as every name listed is notable, and although it is expansive it is finite.  Curbon7 ( talk ) 20:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Members are notable, list potentially provides other ways of browsing our content on these academics, well-defined group of subjects.  Espresso Addict ( talk ) 02:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep