Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Diamond (doctor)


 * 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   no consensus. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

John Diamond (doctor)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

BLP with no external sources. Seems mostly promotional. B (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:11, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't understand... three out of the five sources are external. There is no "sales pitch" on the page - all of the statements are factual or historical and do not make any qualitative claims. So how can I remedy the issues you see in the page? I'm new to Wikipedia editing and have been lambasted by coi (my fault due to poor name choice) and so forth and it really feels like nothing I could do to the page would keep passing editors happy! I know, I know - don't take it personally. I didn't think there'd be such a learning curve - I haven't even gone on to another article yet this one has required so much attention. Well, now I know. And any help would certainly be appreciated. Thanks, AKDiamond (talk) 14:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The problem isn't that the article is promotional, is that it doesn't establish notablity through the third-party sources generally accepted for Wikipedia. Vartanza (talk) 04:59, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What are the "acceptable" third-party sources? Price-Pottenger is certainly well established; Lynne McTaggart, the author of another source, has her own Wikipedia page; and AK (Applied Kinesiology) is the premier kinesiology journal. I'll see what I can dig up, so please allow some time for me to do so. Thanks, AKDiamond (talk) 17:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * How about a strong book endorsement by the president, at the time (2000), of the Society for the Arts in Healthcare, or the president, at the time (2000), of the Theosophical Society in America? Kinesiologists, with maybe two exceptions, don't get mainstream press coverage - that does not necessarily mean that they are not notable in their field. I think your criteria for what constitutes a notable source may be a little inappropriately applied in this case. Please address this. Thanks, AKDiamond (talk) 01:28, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This help his case at all? AKDiamond (talk) 01:39, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  —John Z (talk) 20:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails notability by virtue under established criteria. There is no basis to create new criteria.
 * Point me to the list of sources that Wikipedia considers notable then. (I can certainly point you to a thousand BLPs that have no external sources at all.) It would be nice for one person to address the questions I have asked! Or is the policy "delete first, answer questions later"? AKDiamond (talk) 14:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I am not sure he is notable as a scientist, but he is more generally as an author. From GN Archive searching on  "John Diamond" music, after ruling out a number of other people, I find   are the following references. 1. The music critic Schonberg in the NY Times "Keep away from the musical note "C," warns kinesiologist Dr. John Diamond in a new book. He says that anybody exercising to music ..."  NY Times    2. Chicago Tribune Chicago Tribun   3.  LA Times  4. Marie-Claire 5  And a fascinating article in Sterophile That's just one aspect of his work, but I think it's enough DGG (talk) 01:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for those links, DGG. Perhaps somebody can tell me this: Do these sources need to be quoted in the article now, to address the "notable external sources" complaint? Or is the fact that they exist enough to address that? If they do need to be added, I would be grateful for some help from somebody who has access to the first three links. Thanks, AKDiamond (talk) 13:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I am the article's primary author (though it's probably clear from looking at this page). Dr. Diamond is certainly notable as an author - his book Your Body Doesn't Lie is currently at #39,708 in Books on Amazon, and it was written in 1979, showing the perennial influence of his kinesiological writings. I know that he became known, around that time, on the talk show circuit as "the Doc who knocks the rock" - even once having an on-air argument with Meatloaf. Unfortunately I'm not able to find these earlier materials (thanks to DGG for finding some related articles). Any help or suggestions would be appreciated - though I do not think deletion is warranted, the article could certainly use improvement. Thanks, AKDiamond (talk) 13:50, 11 August 2009 (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.