Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abhay R Vasavada


 * 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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) xinbenlv  Talk, Remember to "ping" me 05:38, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Abhay R Vasavada

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

BLP, unsourced for 2 years. Either it needs sources or it needs to go. Dirk Beetstra T C 13:10, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Dirk Beetstra T  C 13:10, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:19, 23 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep: While I agree with Nom about sources, especially on a BLP, there appears to be sourcing just not used in the article. I have not examined them in depth so listed them in "Comments" below for consideration and possible inclusion. Otr500 (talk)

Comments

 * The article does not have references, certainly no inline citations, but uses the old practice of sourcing through "External links". As a BLP the standards are mandated to be higher and this practice seems to really only prevent a BLP-PROD that could force the use of required references. The one link that caught my eye "One of the Most Influential People in Ophthalmology" (nice puff wording) and was a dead link so I removed it. The Eyeworld link is concerning "New lens seeks to solve problems of presbyopia-correcting IOLs", doctor Frank Goes Jr., MD (the author) and the "Goes Eye Centre", but not the subject.
 * I would normally agree about the references and the two years of languishing but the content states, "To his credit, he has contributed 140 publications in peer reviewed national & international journals" which is interesting, and I found this link, which if reliable indicates a higher degree of notability.
 * The "resume of awards" seems pretty impressive with the exception of the "top 50". Eyeworld does have a profile on the subject, his practice, and family. The subject has contributed to PubMed Central (PMC). The subject and his clinic apparently performs clinical trials and submits the findings to the American Journal of Ophthalmology. Otr500 (talk) 15:12, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There are lot of claims and awards without any kind of references. How can we verify these claims even if it is true? How can be that considered as a encyclopedia content? Is WP:AGF enough? - The9Man  ( Talk ) 10:38, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak delete per WP:PROF. If the article had been written in 2006, instead of 2016, I would assume good faith about the references about this person. I found a few newsletters and press releases online, but they are not reliable. The only article on Google news that might be considered scholarship is not by him - it's about a peptide outside his field of scholarship. I found a few articles at G scholar, but again, they are not all by him. Bearian (talk) 02:31, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 01:44, 2 March 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 15:09, 12 March 2020 (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.