Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerry Nahum


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 21:09, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Gerry Nahum

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Seemingly non-noteworthy scientist.  Random Time  13:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep There does seem to be mention and discussion of Dr. Gerard G. Nahum in reliable literature. He graduated from Stanford with his MD in 1984, after a B.S. in Chemistry and Engineering from Yale in 1978. From 1998-2004 he was an associate clinical professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Duke University School of Medicine. He now works for Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals in Wayne, N.J., where he is head of their "Global Clinical Development for Women's Healthcare" initiative in the U.S. (See Bio.)  Regarding the literature, see, for example:
 * These details aside, an example of the intricacies involved, conceptually wise in terms of pure hard science and equations, when even attempting to quantify the theory of the soul, or rather good or bad moral energy inherent in a person, in terms of modern science, is captured well in the 2005 review of American chemical engineer and physician Gerry Nahum’s 1978 “A Proposal for Testing the Energetics of Consciousness and its Physical Foundation”, in Mary Roach's popular book Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife, in which he proposed to experimentally weight the departing soul thermodynamically at the point of death of people in laboratory using electromagnetic sensors based on a type of negative entropy theory and the mass-energy equivalence relation. --from Sadi-Carnot (2010) "Thermodynamics of Hell" Encyclopedia of Human Thermodynamics (a wiki)
 * I would urge editors to look at the information available on Dr. Nahum, and base their decision to keep or not on the guidelines, particularly academics criteria 7. The person has made substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity. as well as the general notability criteria regarding adequate reliable, independent sources on the subject. --Bejnar (talk) 17:55, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not reach notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:38, 26 January 2011 (UTC).
 * Delete. There is a bit in the Roach book, an interview or two with Roach talking about her book, this not entirely inspiring book that mentions Roach's mention of Nahum ... and nothing that really kicks him over the GNG bar. - 2/0 (cont.) 06:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BIO1E. And in this case the "one thing" is really only the mention of him in Roach's book. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I have attempted to measure the weight of this article and the result is a lack of notability. Qworty (talk) 08:58, 31 January 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.