Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fatoş Tanzer

__NOINDEX__ 
 * 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. joe deckertalk to me 03:11, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Fatoş Tanzer

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Blatant self-promotion. No real evidence of notability. No good references. Mention of many articles written still does not seem to provide notability. Speedy deletion request was removed by original contributor against policy. Dmol (talk) 01:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 4 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Per WP:SELF, WP:PROMOTION and WP:NOTBLOG, this article fails things that should be avoided in an article and also does not meet enough notability to sustain its maintenance. Eduemoni↑talk↓  02:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I cannot find any significant coverage to establish the notability of Ms. Tanzer. Deyyaz [ Talk 02:15, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Let's begin by assuming good faith of the original author here, please. We have a woman who has been a physician and scientist in Turkey for nearly 45 years - I think that she is well past the point where she needs to engage in "blatant self-promotion".  WP:SELF does not apply at all to this article, as that discusses how we should refer to Wikipedia on Wikipedia.  As for WP:NOTBLOG, this article has no resemblance whatsoever to a blog.  A Google Scholar search shows that she is the author or co-author of many scientific papers.  I will leave it to others better qualified than I to determine whether she meets WP:ACADEMIC, as I am not an academic myself.  We may well conclude that she does not meet our notability standards, but let's not treat this eminent woman with disrespect. Cullen328 (talk) 05:27, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. A little checking actually shows that this is indeed most likely a vanity page. It was created by the single-purpose account "Proffatos" (likely Professor Fatos), whose entire edit history shows exclusive service of this article. It's a mistake to assume someone is above self-promotion just because they have some accomplishments and have been active in their field for many years. Thanks, Agricola44 (talk) 15:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC).


 * Weak Delete. WoS query "Author=(tanzer f*) Refined by: Institutions=(CUMHURIYET UNIV OR HACETTEPE UNIV) Timespan=All Years. Databases=SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI" does show 30 papers, but the citations are 60, 7, 7, 7, 6, 5 for an h-index of 5. This is quite short of our usual pass criteria for WP:PROF #1. Probably could have said week keep if she were to have been the corresponding author on that first paper, but the WoS data show that she is not the corresponder on that one, nor on many of the other publications. Given that there are no biographical sources, article should be stripped to a stub if kept because it's currently almost all WP:OR. Thanks, Agricola44 (talk) 15:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC).
 * Delete. GS gives cites of 65, 16, 10, 4, much the same as WoS. Not enough. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:04, 5 April 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.