Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Lowey (2nd nomination)


 * 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. &mdash; Scientizzle 21:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Lowey
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable biography I'm afraid. Fails WP:ACADEMIC and has no coverage to allow notability per WP:GNG. The previous AfD in 2006 kept the article as he was part of a group that won a Pharmaceutical Care Award in 2002, but the only hits for that on wp are his article and the previous AfD, so that award is insufficient for notability. Bigger digger (talk) 19:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Claim to fame is the award, but that award does not appear itself to be notable enough to help the subject to pass WP:ACADEMIC. Location (talk) 23:20, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree – this seems to be some sort of trade award that the article takes some WP:COATRACK liberty to explain at length. No other notability. Article is WP:SPA-created, is an orphan, and is mostly promotional in tone – all of which are further indicators of lack of notability. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 14:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC).
 * Delete. If for no other reason  than it  is completely  unsourced and if it had been eligible under the new BLPPROD it would have gone by  now. The previous AfD defaulted to  keep  for lack  of consensus, but  this time round the issue of sources is critical. Look  hard enough and there are a couple of research  papers to  be found, and he may  have got  his PhD by  now, nothing  of which  makes him  notable.--Kudpung (talk) 12:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - This paper would indicate he has indeed got his DPharm now, and he has co-authered a book. But that isn't really enough to qualify him as a notable academic. -- Whpq (talk) 16:27, 20 October 2010 (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.