| Revision as of 10:42, 6 March 2006 editMatt Crypto (talk | contribs)23,089 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:24, 6 March 2006 edit undoAlpha269 (talk | contribs)179 edits →[]: deleteNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| * '''Delete'''. No evidence of notability presented. ] 10:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | * '''Delete'''. No evidence of notability presented. ] 10:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Comment''': I first heard of Courtois in connection with the ]. Whether this makes him notable enough to deserve his own bio is questionable, but he is a genuine academic cryptographer with a publication record. As are, of course, several hundred other researchers in the field, and we probably don't want a biography article for every one of them. ] 10:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | * '''Comment''': I first heard of Courtois in connection with the ]. Whether this makes him notable enough to deserve his own bio is questionable, but he is a genuine academic cryptographer with a publication record. As are, of course, several hundred other researchers in the field, and we probably don't want a biography article for every one of them. ] 10:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Delete''' per nom, not notable -- ] 15:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:24, 6 March 2006
Nicolas Courtois
I'm not at all convinced of the notability of this person. His first published paper appeared in 2000; he has 17, according to MathSciNet (or 20 according to a bio online). I believe the length of time has not been enough to make him truly notable. Even if he is an up and coming star (although this is not at all clear to me), can't we wait until he's won some awards or something? I wish to encourage some discussion and establish his notability and so I'm nominating the article. I'll start with saying I favor delete although I may change my mind based on discussion. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 10:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. No evidence of notability presented. Gamaliel 10:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: I first heard of Courtois in connection with the XSL attack. Whether this makes him notable enough to deserve his own bio is questionable, but he is a genuine academic cryptographer with a publication record. As are, of course, several hundred other researchers in the field, and we probably don't want a biography article for every one of them. — Matt Crypto 10:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, not notable -- Alpha269 15:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)