Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdullah Baqui


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was Speedy Keep (nomination withdrawn with no other arguments to delete; non-admin closure). -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 21:41, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Abdullah Baqui

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

The article was declined 6 times in "Articles for Creation"; This persistence makes me suspect strong WP:COI. An average MD. Besides run-of-the-mill awards, the only notablility claim is that his UNICEF allegedly based some recommendation of his research. (which may be true, but now it is original research, by the way) Which is kinda overstatement. There were A LOT of people doing the same kind of research. For example zinc was linked to diarrhea and a number of other postnatal problems at least in early 1970s (when the honored doctor was not yet). Unless there is an independent source which says that he was pioneering, not just reproducing the same study but in a different country. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * withdrawn I guess snowball keep. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, clearly meets the GNG, has received significant coverage in The Financial Express and by Bangladesh's national news agency. The latter says: "His work on micronutrient has led the WHO and UNICEF to recommend the use of zinc to reduce mortality in children with diarrhoeal disease. His research in the field of vaccines against respiratory infections has led the governments of Bangladesh, India and Nepal to introduce the HIB vaccine in their countries." I wonder whether the nominator bothered to look at the references. Per the same source, one of his papers was selected Paper of the Year by The Lancet in 2008. That seems more than just a "run-of-the-mill" award, too. The article definitely needs work, but just as definitely OR and notability are not among its problems. Huon (talk) 23:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * A Bangladeshi newspaper is not an expert in medicine and clearly not neutral internationally. I say zinc was known since early 1970s, and to claim that this random doctor is credited with zinc is wild exaggerration. However of course I respect opinions of other wikipedias. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. There are sufficient independent sources for GNG. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC).
 * Keep not sure why this is here. Significant coverage and press. Yes, it does need some rewriting, but the sources are definitely there. MountainMan11 (talk) 20:35, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.