Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Datis Kharrazian


 * 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. clear consensus that it meets neither GNG nor WP:PROF  DGG ( talk ) 05:21, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Datis Kharrazian

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I propose this article be deleted. It does not fit many of Wikipedia's guidelines for a biography. The creator of the page did NOT address issues and continues to include biographical and achievement statements that are NOT found in the low-quality sources being cited and removed warnings about orphan pages and missing information.

Sources are not high-quality secondary sources or are self-published sources. Creator of the page also did not contest the deletion, but rather chose to remove the tag completely without discussion. Once again, I propose a Delete. Lesslikely (talk) 23:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I have removed the citations to articles that seemed unrelated and will strive to add citations that are more appropriate. Would appreciate any advice to improve the biography Budfawcett (talk) 00:44, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Budfawcett The use of references from PubMed and Medline is not a problem when they contain relevant things to be referenced in the article. However, there are several statements on the page that are not referenced by high-quality secondary sources like a high-quality newspaper website or journalistic website. For example, where did the statement about his birthplace come from? Or the statement about him teaching thousands of clinicians with his teaching model? Or the statement about him receiving a reward? There are no high-quality sources for this person. Several of them are faculty pages. It's irrelevant if it's a Harvard faculty page. Until there are high-quality secondary and tertiary sources in the future, this person should not have a Wikipedia page. Every clinician or researcher is not meant to have a Wikipedia page, even if they are from Harvard. Wikipedia pages host biographies if they meet the guidelines for a biography. This page does not. Please see Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary,_secondary_and_tertiary_sources Lesslikely (talk) 00:56, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Budfawcett Here are several other problematic statements.

''"His first book, Why Do I have Thyroid Symptoms When My Lab Tests Are Normal? was published in 2010 and promoted a paradigm shift on how hypothyroidism is managed with diet, nutrition, and lifestyle medicine.[5][6] " '' Promotion of Amazon book, and using low-quality sources to promote the idea of a "paradigm shift".

"He was the first author to show the clinical management of hypothyroidism needs to involve an autoimmune approach.[7] "

'''This is not true. Systematic searches of Medline and several other scientific databases will show research papers discussing the connection between autoimmune disorders and hypothyroidism for several decades.'''

"Patients suffering from hypothyroid disease who were helped by his book went on to develop two thyroid patient-advocacy organizations, Hey Hashi’s[8] and Hashimoto’s 411.[9]"

''"His second book, Why Isn’t My Brain Working?, was published in 2013 and serves as a functional neurochemistry reference for both lay readers and practitioners.[10]" '' Again, where is the high-quality secondary evidence for this?

"Kharrazian has developed a clinical model of functional medicine that has been taught to thousands of health care providers throughout the United States and Europe".

'''This doesn't sound like a neutral objective statement. Where is the evidence for this statement?'''

"Kharrazian was born in Tehran, Iran in 1974. His family migrated to Del Mar, California in 1979 during the Iranian Revolution. "

No reference from a high-quality secondary, tertiary source.

"He is a Diplomate of the American Clinical Board of Nutrition, a Diplomate of the Board of Nutrition Specialists, a member of the American Society for Nutrition, and a Fellow of the American College of Nutrition."

'''No indication on the reference for this information. Furthermore, who else would know this?''' Lesslikely (talk) 01:31, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Budfawcett Do you have any connection to Datis Kharrazian? If you do, the self-promoting in the article has violated the neutrality of the page. Lesslikely (talk) 01:30, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Lesslikey, I will pass on your comments to Dr. Kharrazian to see what can be updated. Budfawcett (talk) 01:44, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 03:44, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 03:44, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Hhkohh (talk) 03:44, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 03:44, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 03:44, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Again, I don't think this page can be improved because getting rid of the poor sources isn't enough, there simply aren't any high-quality sources in the first place. I believe a Delete may be the best option. Especially considering that the creator of the page has admitted above to being affiliated with the subject, which has led to favorable, promotional bias in the language of the page. I don't think this is at all appropriate. Wikipedia is not a place for self-promotion. Lesslikely (talk) 06:49, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your information. I'll see if I can improve the sources and the writing. There are many links on the internet. But I'm not sure what wikipedia moderators consider 'high quality' since so many websites are low quality in looks, but high quality in content. Budfawcett (talk) 16:59, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: I joined Wikipedia about ten years ago. I object to the deletion of my first published article about Datis Kharrazian accepted by Wikipedia in September 2017. I removed its orphan status a week ago, as suggested by the orphan notice at the top of the page. That notice also included a note that the notice could be removed without explanation if I contested removal of the article. I'm not a professional writer or professional wiki editor, but the 15-sentence article now seems to be neutral and unbiased. If you have suggestions on where to improve this article I would appreciate any feedback. Additional citations will be added as available. Thanks for your continued feedback and improvements to my article. Budfawcett (talk) 18:24, 10 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment striking addition to WikiProject schools. Subject isn't about a school or a founder of a school that would attract a school-related redirect. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 19:28, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - does not appear to meet WP:NPROF or WP:GNG.  please note that each user should only make one bolded "keep" or "delete" comment, and as nominator your "delete" is assumed. It would be a good idea for you to remove the boldface or even add tags around your "delete"s. More info here. --bonadea contributions talk 20:13, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment not that it's going to surprise anyone given all the above but this bozo's apparently advertising for help with stopping the article from being deleted. Nice of him to say he's willing to pay top dollar too, I must say. 185.220.70.168 (talk) 20:46, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment I find this highly disturbing and disappointing. It is clear that the author and creator of the page tried to maintain his/her neutrality, but then somehow the subject was immediately informed of the possible impending deletion and is now looking for a way to prevent that by hiring someone to clean up the page. I seriously believe the neutrality of this page is compromised and the creator has a serious conflict of interest here that has biased the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lesslikely (talk • contribs) 21:02, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for calling me a BOZO on wikipedia... Really? I'm not a professional writer or wiki editor, just looking to improve my content on Wikipedia. Budfawcett (talk) 21:15, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Budfawcett, you are the creator, you are also the subject of the page and have been found to request services to keep your own Wikipedia page. Not every person is meant to have a Wikipedia page. Please check the guidelines for biographies. You also advertise your books throughout and have written several statements with the intention of self-promotion, though they are now deleted because I brought the discussion up. However, there is still a serious lack of any reputable, third-party sources on the page, and it reads like a self-promotion rather than a biography. Several of the references are obscure websites that anyone can edit. Again, there is a conflict of interest here. Lesslikely (talk) 21:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Update: The subject of the article has now made the request page for help from a Freelancer on Upwork private. Lesslikely (talk) 21:32, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, checking on Upwork to see if anyone had any magic bullets, or suggestions. I appreciate everyone's feedback and some of the updates that happened yesterday from WIKI users. I have read both of Dr. Kharrazian's books and some of his research articles. So yes, I'm a fan. I think he is a notable doctor/writer when I compare him to some other doctor/author bios on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, some of the contributors to the talk page might think he is not notable enough for a page, and initially asked for a delete. So let the Wiki admins determine whether he is notable enough, and if any of the talk page followers want to improve the verbiage on the page, or update citations on the page, that would be great. Since I received an inflammatory comment on this public WIKI talk page (I think it's public) from an unidentified user with an iP address (well that's not my cup of tea), I'd rather spend my free time with my kids. I think the page is neutral enough, and more citations can be added as they become available. So my comments will end here. Thanks again. ### Budfawcett (talk) 00:54, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Budfawcett I would advise that you halt editing this page. Please look at your talk page and notice the conflict of interest notice. You have previously stated that you are in touch with Datis Kharrazian. You are also the creator of the page. You also have information about his birth, and several other pieces of information not found in the references cited. Who else would know these things besides Datis himself or someone close to him? Furthermore, you attempted to advertise on UpWork to hire a freelancer to edit this page as to not have your Wikipedia page deleted. It seems abnormal for a "fan" to go out of his/her way, even financially, to keep a Wikipedia page about a person they've read a "few research articles about". Wikipedia editors are not that gullible. Lesslikely (talk) 23:09, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Lesslikely Of course I asked Dr. Kharrazian his birthdate and requested a copyright free photo. If I look at other bios of living persons, how else is it done if the info and photo are not readily available online. There are so many examples of birthdate's that are not cited. I was fishing for free info from Upwork but came up empty. Like many people I googled Wikipedia editors, and Upwork came up. My only intent is to publish a neutral article, and it started with rewriting his online biography which was not neutral. Thanks for assisting in making it better. My intent was never to self-promote for Dr. Kharrazian, just to note his contributions to science, teaching, etc. Budfawcett (talk) 21:08, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Lesslikely I have checked my talk page and I have added the connected contributor tag (hopefully) to the correct places. Thanks. Budfawcett (talk) 22:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete nothing even close to meeting the notability qualifications for academics.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:11, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment John Pack Lambert This was my point. If every academic, who's published a few papers in relatively obscure journals and who's written their own books deserved to have a Wikipedia page, the site would be filled with far too many unnecessary biographies. Also, a page that is far from neutral, reads like an advertisement, and is created by someone with a very clear conflict of interest? I don't think it meets the criteria to stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lesslikely (talk • contribs) 02:04, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not remotely a pass of WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:52, 14 July 2018 (UTC).
 * Delete as Nom...does not appear to meet WP:NPROF or WP:GNG, Fails. Emily Khine (talk) 07:58, 16 July 2018 (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.