Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keyur Parikh


 * 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 per WP:BIO. — Nearly Headless Nick   {C}  12:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Keyur Parikh

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

Article about a non-notable doctor mostly written by his son Shivam Parikh. All the claims to fame in the article are common to all doctors in the world and there is nothing that really distinguishes this doctor from others. Just writing articles in journals (which tons of doctors do) or meeting important people does not make him famous. The one award which seems important (the award from the Cardiology Association) is given to literally dozens of doctors every year. See this list of 2008 awardees. So the article must be deleted. Amdavadi123 (talk) 05:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  —Amdavadi123 (talk) 05:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Uncertain about notability, but I've deleted the laughably false claim that he's "one of the leading cardiologists in the world". He has awfully few publications for such a distinction, and a rather prosaic series of Google web and news hits. Hairhorn (talk) 05:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Delete Not notable, written by familymember (COI).·Maunus· ƛ · 13:30, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 *  Pub List  : From what I could tell, the one link in the article is to an award list showing KH Parikh. This is the pub list I got from pub med,

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&term="Parikh%20KH"[Author]

with only 6 entires but obviously subject to distortion etc. I don't have any easy way to tell if 1 of these papers was cited 1000's of times etc. I guess I'd think weak keep if you can find reliable Indian sources to something other than hard-core research accomplishments. One recent paper does claim to be first in man, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19527978?ordinalpos=4&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum. It is too new to have gotten a lot of citations but maybe this was mentioned in popular press somewhere. Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 10:38, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep There is no way of knowing whether Indian publications are widely cited in India--there is no appropriate citation index that covers them. As for papers covered in the international literature, Scopus shows 11 papers, but the highest citations are only 8, 6, 3. We've usually figured that the appropriate standards for a researcher are international. For a physician tho, that';s not the case, and the qy is whether his medical work in India is notable. The only relevant information is that Times of India quoted him, referring to him as "another leading cardiologist." and Gujarat.global said a previous ed. of his book "was amongst the top ten selling books" I think that's just barely enough. . DGG (talk) 18:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

the above comments. I would mention that citation counts for my papers (LOL) seem to be low when happen to see them in various places. I only say that because looking through Scirus, I find many citations over the years. These tend to be in specialty low-impact journals but citing authors tend to be at reputable institutions. fwiw.Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 *  Comment  : Wiki criteria I've read single out medicial stuff for allowing more reliance on primary sources because they say the press usually gets it wrong. "leading cardiologist" is puffery in any case- can you tell me what this would mean or not mean? I'm not arguing for delete, just qualify

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:14, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Weak delete doesn't look like he is notable now, but could be in the future. Could use a few more refs as well. The Weak Willed 00:23, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep borderline notability (based principally on WP:ACADEMIC)--err on the side of retaining info. JJL (talk) 00:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - it is obvious that is actually Shivam Parikh himself writing vanity articles about himself and his dad. If you go to http://www.rdosti.com/ which he claims to be the 'CEO' of, you can go to the bottom which says Copyright � India.hn, 2008. - Amdavadi123 (talk) 14:32, 7 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.