 | This article was nominated for deletion on June 23 2009. The result of the discussion was delete. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
This page should not be speedy deleted because...
editThis page should not be speedily deleted because... David Lipford --Certicom (talk) 13:23, 17 January 2016 (UTC) Dr. Wang is a professor with more than 3500 google scholar citation and h-index larger than 30. In particular, he has important contributions to randomness and cryptography
Some references and citations have been added to the page to justify that this page should not be deleted. I hope this is sufficient. thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Certicom (talk • contribs) 01:53, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Drop RLCE
editRLCE was never a strong protocol or a serious contender for NIST's PQ competition. It did not survive long enough to even be considered for merger with other submissions for round #2 https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/nistir/8240/final
You'll find all relevant discussions of RLCE in the thread https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/Projects/Post-Quantum-Cryptography/documents/round-1/official-comments/RLCE-KEM-official-comment.pdf Yongge Wang sent a grand total of three emails in this conversation, two extremely short.
Yongge Wang appears notable based on his citation index alone, but RLCE looks very far from his finest work, and three small emails is not notable enough participation in a standards conversation.
I think the article will be stronger without mentioning RCLE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.159.74.67 (talk) 21:11, 28 October 2019 (UTC)