Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arun K. Garg


 * 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. Decision made per general consensus, WP:SPAM, and WP:BLP. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  02:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Arun K. Garg

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Also page Dr. Arun K. Garg (see this edit).


 * Notability? Autobiography? Reads like a CV. See tags at the start of page Arun K. Garg. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:26, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, obviously, as I added a prod2 tag. But why this AfD, why not let the prod run its course and only waste our time at AfD if it would be removed? --Crusio (talk) 11:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Page Arun K. Garg has so many tags that I thought I better get matters discussed properly. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:25, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, but there's already a PROD tag!! ╟─ Treasury Tag ► contribs ─╢ 16:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Self-serving CV, with no supported Notability. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  13:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  13:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep Both articles were already in an unfinished PROD process, which should be allowed to run its course. Renominate without prejudice after PROD is done. Rklear (talk) 20:06, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No, the "procedural" thing to do here is to continue with the AfD. Once an article has been nominated for AfD this procedure takes precedence - see WP:PROD. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * To make this abundantly clear, I have deprodded the article. --Crusio (talk) 23:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete since a job and an article or two is not enough to satisfy WP:N. Drmies (talk) 20:40, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep  I think he might be a notable specialist on implantology, an important dental subspeciality/ His book Bone biology, harvesting, grafting for dental implants : rationale and clinical applications is in about 80 libraries, which is about the same as other books in the field. His books have been translated into several languages. He has articles in the principal journals. DGG (talk) 08:55, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Citation impact is not negligible, but taken alone a bit short of what would be needed to meet WP:PROF criterion #1 (significant impact in scholarly discipline, broadly construed). News coverage indicates some notability, although some of it is primarily related to Implant Seminars and rather commercial.--Eric Yurken (talk) 19:13, 7 March 2009 (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.