Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drummond Rennie


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Esquivalience t 00:50, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Drummond Rennie

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This biographical article was created by a now-blocked sock, has an apparent COI problem, and it's bloated with promotional language and resume-like content. This was prodded, understandably. But initial searches turn up some substantial coverage of his work as deputy editor of JAMA (examples:, and he won the AAAS Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility for his career efforts on behalf of scientific integrity. So I think it's better that this gets the more detailed scrutiny of AfD.  I'm currently undecided about this, and would especially like to hear opinions from editors experienced in the medical area. Arxiloxos (talk) 16:40, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as PROD'er mentioned above. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. The irony of a person involved in publishing ethics getting a spam article notwithstanding, I cleaned it up. Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:45, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Thanks to Opabinia regalis this now reads like a perfectly good article for a notable academic. Thanks. LaMona (talk) 05:15, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable academic; spam issues now resolved. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 19:28, 21 June 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.