Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles F. Lynch


 * 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. The only unstruck keep argument seems to be somewhat WP:POINT-y.  A  Train talk 07:25, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Charles F. Lynch

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No real references or evidence of notability Rathfelder (talk) 22:38, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete several orders of magnitude below the level of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:28, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. He's a university professor who holds a position that may meet WP:ACADEMIC criterion #5. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:29, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * To clarify: He's a professor at a university. His job title is "professor". That position is not enough for criterion #C5. If his job title were "University Professor", it might pass that criterion, but that's a different title than the one he has. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:50, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * There is no such job title "University Professor" in existence. "Professor" is the highest professorship title at any university (with Assistant and Associate Professor below). I brought up that title not to suggest notability, but only to indicate that WP:ACADEMIC is applicable. I erred in naming C5 as applicable. I was referring to his title of "Medical Director" of the State Health Registry of Iowa, which might qualify for one of the other criteria, like C3, C6, or C8. ~Anachronist (talk) 13:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * There certainly is such a title; at my university, it is above "Distinguished Professor" and is held by very few people; see e.g. for one. In the German system, it is the standard English translation for Universitätsprofessor, a step above Professor. —David Eppstein (talk) 13:54, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Interesting. I come from a family of academics, and none of the institutions in which my family members worked have that title. Come to think of it, my Dad became "Professor Emeritus" but I think that's a post-retirement title. In any case, I'm still wondering if the title of "Director" would qualify under any of the WP:ACADEMIC criteria. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:44, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That depends entirely on director of what. The only WP:PROF criterion that it would fit is #C6, "highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society". But I think the state health registry of Iowa is not an academic institute at all, so you would have to rely on WP:GNG rather than WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:05, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * i concur - certainly there is such a title at the vast majority of universities, especially top-tier Carnegie R1 universities although yes, the name may vary slightly with "Distinguished" or "University" or even "Distinguished University" professor being common. To cite an example - since sources are so important: says "University Professors are selected for internationally recognized eminence in their fields", wish in fact is exactly notability within the wider academic world. Anyone (almost) can become a professor, that is more about longevity than notability. And any professor who retires (almost) can become emeritus. There is nothing notable about that. Many or most academics become professor eventually.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal

(talk) 13:08, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:08, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:08, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:08, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:27, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:05, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment In my opinion does not meet WP:NPROF with the given evidence of position/relevance. Dysklyver  09:47, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:PROF Does not meet #C6 or #C5 .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:23, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep WTF! A cricketer makes a single first class appearance and gets an article. Lynch publishes a paper on cancer that is cited 1600 times, and people spit.  Total citations according to Google Scholar 30,000  He's a full professor since 1998. Rhadow (talk) 23:03, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * He may be very notable, but the article doesn't say why. Rathfelder (talk) 16:09, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
 * We keep articles on notable subjects regardless of whether the article says why. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:51, 28 October 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.