Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher B-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   merge to B-Lynch suture. Black Kite (talk) 21:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Christopher B-Lynch

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Impressive-sounding biography. However, upon closer examination, things look a bit differently. Several surgical "inventions" are being claimed and substantiated by primary sources (references to the person's own work). However, the impact of these inventions seems to be very limited: the Web of Science lists 8 article by b-Lynch, cited a grand total of 72 times (highest citation counts 28, 22, 13, 6; h-index=4). There is one independent source, to the Sierra Leone Awareness Times. I am not sure whether this is a major newspaper, but in any case the item is rather short. There is also a "National Honor" listed under "awards". From the reference, which lists 151 names, including a "laundryman", a cook, and a "messenger", this does not appear to be a major award either. Summing up, this appears to fall short of WP:PROF and WP:BIO. Hence: Delete. Guillaume2303 (talk) 08:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, as per nom. Francl (talk) 11:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete (Changing my opinion to "Redirect/Merge", see below.) Fails WP:ACADEMIC. I found only three articles by him at PubMed, and I found a couple of minimally cited articles at Google Scholar (needed to search under Balogun-Lynch). Google News Archive search was the same as nominator: one article in the Awareness Times. The prize does not look "major" enough to qualify him on that basis. --MelanieN (talk) 01:05, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I am a little surprised that you feel the British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, and Milton Keynes hospital's own website/news pages are being considered unreliable sources, or non-independent. With UK honours a cook, laundryman or messenger can be given honours for their services in areas other than their main job. The mere fact that the B-Lynch suture is at the forefront of post-partum haemorrhaging prevention fulfils WP:Academic:
 * 1. The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.
 * Most importantly, this article is not about his academic prowes, it is about gynaecology and his work in that field. As such it certainly fulfils:
 * Notability - people:
 * 2. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.
 * Creative professionals (including Scientists, academics, economists, professors [...]
 * 2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
 * Additional refs? Daily Telegraph, Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine,                           2000, Vol. 9, No. 3                    :            Pages 194-196 (not by Lynch),  Paper (not by Lynch) describing the suture Chaosdruid (talk) 06:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment The Daily Telegraph article is about the Duchess of Cornwall, with b-Lynch mentioned in-passing. Nobody is saying that those scientific journals are unreliable sources. It's just that we need more than a couple of handfulls of citations to establish notability. Perhaps the technique he developed is notable (I don't think so, but others may have other opinions), but b-Lynch himself misses WP:PROF by a long measure. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 07:17, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment So why try and stick to evaluating him under WP:PROF? No one has claimed that he is academically based; or that he has been in any way shape or form directed through WP:PROF. If it is just that you mistakenly measured him against those criteria and cannot drop it to look at others, I would suggest that even if you do continue to stick to that measure, you at least accept that he does fulfil WP:ACADEMIC 1., in that the B-Lynch suture was a significant impact in his scholarly discipline - though I am not sure how gynaecology is anywhere near a scholarly discipline ... Chaosdruid (talk) 14:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm changing my opinion to Redirect/Merge to B-Lynch suture. Chaosdruid made a good point about the B-Lynch suture.. I did not find much of anything when I searched Google Scholar for this man. But just now I searched for "B-Lynch suture" and found that it is cited in numerous gynecology textbooks and journal articles. It looks to me as if the B-Lynch suture IS notable, and while there is not enough information out there for a separate article about Dr. B-Lynch IMO, information about him could be added to the suture article. That article is an unreferenced stub but that can be fixed. --MelanieN (talk) 13:37, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * There, I added a couple of references to the B-Lynch suture article. --MelanieN (talk) 13:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Here's a weird thing: the original article describing this technique has five authors, of whom B-Lynch is the first, but the Google Scholar page listing it omits his name! Same with this article and this one; his name is omitted and only his coauthor is listed on the Google Scholar search page. I had already suspected the search tools couldn't handle his unusual name, and that may be why we get so few hits searching for him. The first article has been cited 133 times, and the other two 90 and 64 times - good but not great. Still, we may need to find some better way of evaluating him for WP:ACADEMIC. --MelanieN (talk) 15:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see my previous comment about him not being assessed through WP:PROF (which is the same as WP:ACADEMIC) in reply to Guillame2303. Chaosdruid (talk) 14:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:25, 13 September 2012 (UTC)




 * Keep/Merge: Inventor/developer of a new suture technique seems notable to me. 83.71.21.225 (talk) 14:31, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I could certainly live with a redirect/merge as proposed by MelanieN. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 17:02, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 02:05, 22 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Apart from inventing the B-Lynch suture, he is also notable as inventor of other medical innovations, and for being awarded National Honours in Sierra Leone. FurrySings (talk) 03:14, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * As explained above, those national honors don't seem to be very selective. And we don't have much reliable sources to build a bio on. At best, I think, a merge is feasible. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 07:17, 22 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge per MelanieN to B-Lynch suture. - B-Lynch suture clearly meets WP:GNG: B-Lynch in title. However, there is not enough biography information on Christopher B-Lynch for a stand alone article on him per WP:GNG. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 03:02, 30 September 2012 (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.