Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hidetoshi Wakamatsu


 * 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--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 19:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Hidetoshi Wakamatsu

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable academic; article entirely based on a single non-independent source — swpb T 15:14, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. The only thing in the article that looks like a potential pass of WP:PROF is being editor in chief of the Journal of Automatic Control of Physiological State & Function. But that turns out to be one published by the predatory OMICS Publishing Group so the evidence if anything is negative. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:50, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. No demonstration of notability in the absence of any in-depth coverage or third-party sourcing. --DAJF (talk) 01:29, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I had to edit the Wakamatsu.It added a reference today.--9LIMITS (talk) 06:15, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as nothing convincing for the applicable notability. SwisterTwister   talk  23:05, 25 April 2016 (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.