Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashutosh Sharma (biotechnologist)


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:32, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Ashutosh Sharma (biotechnologist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is drawn on non-independent sources, with a few others thrown in which are not actually about the subject. I think this fails WP:PROF. Guy (Help!) 19:39, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. He only got his doctorate in 2012, so may well achieve notability, but currently he fails WP:ACADEMIC. Pburka (talk) 20:06, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Fails WP:ACADEMIC. It's too soon. SW3 5DL (talk) 22:49, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:14, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:14, 13 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. There is another of the same name but it is not this guy WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:18, 13 March 2017 (UTC).
 * Delete Doesn't have the independent coverage for WP:GNG. 2601:248:4500:9523:43C:32C0:AC8B:3F10 (talk) 19:52, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. There appear to be at least six other researchers with the same name: a thin film expert at Kanpur, a medical researcher in New Jersey, a chemist at Roorkee, a diabetes specialist formerly in the UK and now in Dehradun, a dental consultant in Dubai, and another biotechnologist at GNDU Amritsar (still there from 2008-2014 so not the same one as the subject). The others all have more highly cited works in Google scholar, making it difficult to find this one's scholarly impact. I went through 12 pages of Google scholar results for this author name, getting down to papers with around 30 citations each, without finding any by the subject. And his supposedly "most downloaded" paper (meaning, one of 25 papers that were the most downloaded from some specific journal in the last 90 days), "Antibacterial activities of medicinal plants used in Mexican traditional medicine", has only 4 citations, so that doesn't help. With no other claims of notability than scholarly impact, and insufficient evidence of scholarly impact to keep the article on that basis, we should delete. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:37, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete David Eppstein's explanation puts things quite well. Sharma may well at some point reach the point of being an impactful academic, but he has not yet reached that point.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:20, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:PROF and WP:ACADEMIC. CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   13:22, 19 March 2017 (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.