Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isidro A. T. Savillo


 * 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.  So Why  09:02, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Isidro A. T. Savillo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Long and superficially impressive article, but I am struggling to see how he passes WP:NACADEMIC or WP:GNG. Edwardx (talk) 10:20, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:55, 10 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete, even taking into account WP:CSB. Even if he is the same person as Isidro T. Savillo, his highest Google Scholar cite count is 9. He apparently has no academic position, let alone a named professorship or equivalent. He does not meet WP:PROF. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:54, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep, This has been judged as a start page which means that there are significant achievements as supported by references then why delete? In the first place this is not a stub. There are achievements in the article that could provide his notabilityLancet345 (talk) 11:59, 10 July 2017 (UTC) — Lancet345 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * The article class isn't really an indicator of the notability of the topic, . See WikiProject assessment. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:49, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

*Keep, His discoveries are novel and are attributed to him. Why don't we give him a chance rather than be swayed away of what other people of saying to harm his name. If the article needs an edit, then why not do it.Viperqwer (talk) 12:20, 10 July 2017 (UTC) — Viperqwer (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Struck as a blocked sock of Lancet345. Black Kite (talk) 12:52, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. The sources impress in quantity but this is clearly the intention - many are personally created pages about non-notable organisations, usually consisting of a single page of text and a link to his Yahoo mail address. Others establish that certain scientific research exists and is reported on, but fail to mention Savillo or his work. There are a few minor papers co-published by him, but he is cited only a handful of times. Overall the sourcing strikes me as very poor at best, and deliberately misleading at worst. I have been through enough of them to make an informed decision, but my search was not exhaustive, so I am open to correction by anyone who can provide solid evidence of his notability. El Pharao (talk)
 * As an addendum to the above I would also like to point out some of the deliberate attempts on this page to generate a false sense of notability. One of his influences links not to a Wikipedia article but a wikispecies article: https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Harrie_J._M._Sipman, and his book 'Yelwa-Yauri' is hyperlinked as though it had its own page but actually links to two separate and unrelated towns in Nigeria. If this person is notable why the need for deception? El Pharao (talk) 13:22, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep There is no deception here. H. Sipman is his mentor as DAAD scholar in FRG and Yelwa- Yauri is the title of his novel named after a place in Nigeria.112.198.69.77 (talk) 17:32, 11 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment. Lancer and Viper blocked as sockpuppets. Myname is not dave (talk/contribs) 06:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Stuffed with fluff. He "indulges research" and "espouses the environment". And has a script treatment!  E Eng  14:53, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep He is scientist/researcher and a writer. What is wrong with that?112.198.69.77 (talk) 17:32, 11 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep His discoveries which include the use of a lichen, Pyxine cocoes for atmospheric pollution in tropical Asia has been adapted and used in Thailand, India and just recently Indonesia. He is cited in publications and in theses.112.198.98.154 (talk) 17:58, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Not noteworthy. Also be aware there seems to be an effort by ip editors who are possibly socks/meat puppets of our socking friend here... --Tarage (talk) 18:20, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Has had a few minor publications, but fails to meet WP:ACADEMIC as he has no academic position and does not meet any of the other notability criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:55, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as the sources don't demonstrate that the subject has received significant, independent coverage, and neither does a quick search. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:58, 11 July 2017 (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.