Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laxmaiah Manchikanti


 * 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Consensus is sourcing & citation volume is sufficient. Content/conduct issues can be handled elsewhere Star   Mississippi  02:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Laxmaiah Manchikanti

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article has been disputed since its creation to due fake references and a massive conflict of interest, see Conflict of interest/Noticeboard in addition to little outside and third party sources for the existence of any claim made by this article or organizations related to this article. See User talk:Saidul123 - AH (talk) 03:45, 26 June 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting, are there additional sources that could demonstrate GNG? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:44, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2023 June 26.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 04:02, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Education, Medicine, Telangana, Kentucky,  and New York. Skynxnex (talk) 05:30, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Draftify The nomination raises real concerns about the recent state of the article, as does Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard, and I don't want to downplay that. I also want to thank the nominator for their active work toward NPOV. For purposes of AFD, Google Scholar suggests a fair amount of citations, some of which are of papers published in subject's organization's journal, and some of which are of papers published in other journals. And note, subject's organization's journal (Pain Physician) seems to be legitimate, I don't have full access to the major citation indexes, but they at least have record of the journal and the publicly available metrics seem reasonable. Subject seems to meet WP:NACADEMIC.  &mdash;siro&chi;o 08:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: This discussion is evenly divided among those who argue this article, in some state, is worth Keeping and those who are adamant that it be deleted. Would Draftify be a compomise solution? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:PROF and heavily-cited first-author publications. The current stubby and nearly-unsourced state of the article is entirely the fault of the unfortunately-named nominator, who lobotomized the article prior to nominating it for deletion. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:05, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * To be fair to the nominator, the bulk of that article had been created by WP:SPAs, and was not in a good state for WP:NPOV. &mdash;siro&chi;o 23:31, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, or draftify until evidence of notability can be found – the draft currently has none. Maproom (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: No real reliable sources, relies on primary sources. Zippybonzo &#124; Talk (he&#124;him) 20:13, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment @Raymondeugenelane dropped a bunch of sources on Talk:Laxmaiah_Manchikanti. I don't think any of them are significant coverage, but I haven't analyzed them throughly. I think they do serve to verify some of the claims in the article, and several of them seem to be papers citing his work, which may count towards criteria 1 of NPROF.  I'm not opining on those sources or the article topic right now, but I wanted to alert participants in this discussion to those sources on the talk page. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 20:46, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply. I am working to supply significant sourcing. Can you explain what these sources are missing? Or point me to a resource. Again, thanks. Raymondeugenelane (talk) 21:06, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello, @Raymondeugenelane, I want to point you to Conflict of interest/Noticeboard as well, hoping to clear up anything we can. &mdash;siro&chi;o 21:49, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * I've updated my !vote above in response to relisting, seems a prudent course given the history of this article, the work still needed to improve it, and the possibility of more discussion on COI noticeboard . &mdash;siro&chi;o 07:52, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of author publications per David Epstein. I used the Wikipedia Library to search for refs. I found several on newspapers.com which I listed at Talk:Laxmaiah Manchikanti. After awhile, I gave up filling out citation templates. Dr. Manchikanti appears to be the go-to doctor when major newspapers (NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal) are looking for someone to opine on pain management medical practices.


 * Among other things, Dr. Manchikanti was also the owner of a failed for-profit law school for a few months.


 * A ProQuest search turned up numerous papers authored by Dr. Manchikanti. He's written at least one professional-level book and contributed to or been cited in others. 150+ hits on this Wikipedia Library search. Google Scholar lists hundreds of his papers (I stopped at 540) and and they're cited 100s of times.
 * This guy is the real deal (even if he did pay some writer).
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 02:10, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The subject almost certainly meets WP:N. The reason I switched to draftify is the history of issues with the existing article around independence, V, NPOV, and related COI. &mdash;siro&chi;o 02:47, 14 July 2023 (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.