Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akuma Saningong


 * 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 delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 23:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Akuma Saningong

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Purely promotional and written by a UPE. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Cameroon,  and Germany. UtherSRG (talk) 10:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment I started to remove the sources that are really blogs or blurb/PR for his promotional speaking events, but I would be left with little else if I continue. Highly promotional article for which a Wikipedia article is the main component of his notabilitt?! Aszx5000 (talk) 13:43, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * So why not !vote? - UtherSRG (talk) 01:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  16:57, 20 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails WP:NSCIENTIST, other claims are spurious, nothing on Google that isn't press-related. BrigadierG (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete — obviously promotional, not much more to be added. — Biruitorul Talk 20:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Puffery and made up creation. The article doesn't provide variable importance for inclusion, while begging the fact that it lacks context and SIGCOV for WP:NAUTHOR (probably self published books), WP:NSCIENTIST. Doesn't show the need for entry here. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 01:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep | Clear pass for WP:NSCIENTIST, Creteria 1. See the Google Scholar entry for the subject in question: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=En63PXAAAAAJ His refereed article: https://diabetesjournals.org/diabetes/article/58/4/984/105/Functional-Characterization-of-Promoter-Variants has been cited more than 96 times by other academics and his basic research on the subject has led to further insights into understanding the molecular basis of obesity and its prevention. His other peer-reviewed article: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13568-018-0546-y Has been cited 20 times. It was also seminal work in addressing the issue of endocrine disruptors, which are environmental hazards that have a huge impact on humans, such as causing males to develop feminine features like breasts. Also a clear pass for WP:NAUTHOR See WorldCat record for non-self-published book: https://search.worldcat.org/de/search?q=Saningong Sword-Emperor-dev (talk) 05:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * For the record, this is a single-purpose account. Biruitorul Talk 06:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete a UPE article filled with lots of refs that are mostly blogs/press-releases/non-RS entries (I deleted most of them but the blocked UPE returned under a different name to restore them). Several other of the UPEs creation are also at AfD (e.g. Iulia and Delia). The subject is not a notable scientist but they are an active speaker who needs a Wikipedia page to construct notability. Aszx5000 (talk) 21:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)


 * *Strong Keep | Article is not promotional and written in neutral voice and it meets and passes WP:GNG. Article is well researched and backed with secondary references. Anyone doubting should go and check and they aren’t press releases as purported. I happened to have stumbled across this article on the web and I am not the UPE who is claimed to have written the article and there is no proof for that. I have studied other articles of the alleged UPE which were elected for deletion and they weren’t deleted e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Bernstein. It was kept on merit. Why all this hating on Wikipedia? Articles should be kept on merit and in the case of this one it passes Wikipedia guidelines for WP:GNG, WP:NSCIENTIST and WP:NAUTHOR. I might be a single-purpose account because I had the urge to intervene for justice to be served. It shouldn’t infringe my rights not to comment and stand for justice and the truth. Let the facts and evidence speak for themselves. Visit the talk page of the subject in question, where other two seasoned editors and contributors have made comments in favour to keep the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Akuma_Saningong Sword-Emperor-dev (talk) 05:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Striking 2nd !vote by the article creator. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Other UPEs from User:CharlesBNB include Iulia and Delia, Renzo Vitale, and Georg Weissacher. Aszx5000 (talk) 10:11, 27 April 2024 (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.