Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luis Fernando Cifuentes


 * 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Star  Mississippi  02:42, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Luis Fernando Cifuentes

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

This page was created by a paid editor on behalf of the subject. As far as I can tell, they don't pass WP:NPROF (does not hold a named chair or equivalent). Their google scholar profile shows they have only around 20 citations. The article did not go through the AfC process, and was created directly in article space. >>> Ingenuity . talk ; 20:41, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. >>>  Ingenuity . talk ; 20:41, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. >>>  Ingenuity . talk ; 20:41, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I reviewed the article, his personal web site, his cv, and his LinkedIn page. Meets none of the WP:NPROF criteria.— rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:11, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Dear Wikipedia librarians, I am really very surprised and disappointed by the conclusions you have reached regarding the article on Dr. Luis Fernando Cifuentes. He is a prestigious Colombian doctor who in 1997 made a valuable scientific contribution by correlating the relationship between ascorbic acid or vitamin C in the creation of nitric oxide from saliva. He has also made other important contributions in the use of analgesics in the fields of osteoarthritis, neuropathic pain, neurostimulation, among others.

He is a very prestigious scientist who is a member of world-class organisations such as the American College of Clinical Pharmacology, the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and the International Association for the Study of Pain. He is also an member of the National Academy of Medicine.

I really find it hard to understand that because the subject of the article has decided to pay an editor to create the article since he does not know how to do it, one can already draw the conclusion that the article lacks neutrality. I would like to know where in the article there is a glimpse of bias. The conclusions you have reached are really incomprehensible. The article was published a year ago and was in force without any problem until it was declared to contain paid contributions. And with only that element, you guys come to all these conclusions and consider that the article should be eliminated? Please be more serious!

This is an interesting article for Wikipedia because it has scientific rigour and is encyclopaedic in nature, which is the basis of the content to be published on this platform. Please I ask you to remove the tags that have been added and that the article continues to be valid as it has been until now, providing interesting information from scientific studies 100% verifiable by the references given and with valuable findings for the subjects under study. Thank you very much!— Juanma281984 🗣️ 17:44, 2 March 2022 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Juanma281984 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  01:35, 4 March 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   11:48, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Carefully read WP:NPROF to see why the article has been put up for deletion. Nothing you have mentioned is a defense against deletion. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:22, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete. Fails WP:NPROF/WP:GNG. Woodroar (talk) 14:51, 13 March 2022 (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.