Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Garramone


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 04:36, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Charles Garramone

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Lacks the significant independent and reliable coverage from multiple sources to pass the GNG. The only coverage from reliable sources seems to be with the case of that "pregnant man" from a few years back, where he was quoted in an article (not as the doctor involved, but as an outside doctor, at that). Yaksar (let's chat) 04:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 07:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 07:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 07:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 07:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Note - The article's creator has left a long response on the talk page of this discussion. I'm not sure how or what exactly should be copied over here, but you all should probably be aware of it. Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The note on the talk page is not very helpful or very realistic. Example: "Look, Dr. Garramone is the most famous surgeon probably on the planet." And it cites a dozen sources, none of them WP:RELIABLE by Wikipedia criteria. But those who wish to comment here should probably read it out of courtesy. --MelanieN (talk) 17:14, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Being quoted in one article does not make him notable, and Google News finds nothing, so he fails WP:BIO. Google Scholar finds only a single published article, cited only 26 times, so he does not qualify under WP:ACADEMIC either. --MelanieN (talk) 04:30, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete insufficient depth of coverage. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:17, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Basically promotional. Even if it passedthe GNG, which it does not, it would not be a satisfactory Wikipedia article. Looking at the discussion p mentioned above, the contributor compares the appropriateness of this as an article subject with " Kardashian or Donald Trump ..." that's a classic argument— but for  deletion.     DGG ( talk ) 05:21, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I kind of liked the Mother Teresa analogy myself. --MelanieN (talk) 16:49, 7 November 2011 (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.