Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Demetrios Spandidos


 * 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   speedy keep. Wish declined. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 03:42, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Demetrios Spandidos

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Prof. Demetrios A. Spandidos wishes the removal of this Wikipedia page for personal reasons Dtypaldos (talk) 07:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2015 March 9.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 08:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep Sorry to go against the subject's wishes, but Spandidos is editor-in-chief of several academic journals in good standing, making him clearly notable under WP:ACADEMIC. In addition, according to GS he is very highly cited (h-index above 60), another clear meet of ACADEMIC. --Randykitty (talk) 09:57, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 09:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep per WP:OWN. Phantom Tech  (talk) 21:59, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. The article contains a very serious attack on Spandidos, sourced only to a brief Chicago Tribune article. This should either be removed, or better sourcing added, per WP:BLP. -- 120.17.0.168 (talk) 22:06, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * It looks like the next sentence shows Spandidos did nothing wrong so all together the paragraph is not an attack on Spandidos. That said, it might still be a BLP issue for Weinberg if it is improperly sourced. Phantom Tech  (talk) 00:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


 * There can be no doubt that Spendidos is notable, and unfortunately for him, there was more about the 1978 controversy than this Weinberg dispute, see this and this. The article therefore gets a weak keep from me, although it should be noted that it is very deficient and should be expanded to cover all aspects of his biography in WP:DUE weight. --PanchoS (talk) 05:04, 10 March 2015 (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.