Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hikmet Geckil


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:01, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Hikmet Geckil

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Biography of a Turkish molecular biologist, apparently heavily edited by the subject himself. Being an autobio is absolutely no reason for deletion, of course, but does give a certain assurance that anything that might make the subject notable is present in the article (especially since it has been tagged for notability for about a month now). However, the subject does not appear to meet any of the criteria of WP:ACADEMIC and article creation seems to have been premature. The Web of Science lists 30 publications that have been cited 329 times (h-index = 9), so even assuming that these are all by the same person, that is not enough to meet WP:PROF#1 (especially since molecular biology is a high-citation-density field). The only award I can find is a Fulbright fellowship, of which there are thousands each year, so PROF#2 isn't met either. Geckil is not an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (#3). The article lists him as being the "lead editor" of a textbook, but that seems to concern translation only (see also here) and therefore does not meet #4 either. There is no evidence that Geckil at this point meets any of the remaining criteria or WP:GNG. Hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 12:45, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete for lack of evidence of passing WP:PROF. His citations aren't quite strong enough to convince me of WP:PROF (although they're not far off) and there seems to be nothing else. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:15, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Too early. May get there in time. Xxanthippe (talk) 11:04, 19 August 2013 (UTC).
 * Delete, I don't usually like to say "per nom", but in this case the nominator has done their homework and I concur entirely. Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:41, 24 August 2013 (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.