Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark R. Graczynski


 * 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. Will reconsider if better sourcing can be found. W.marsh 17:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Mark R. Graczynski

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

With all due respect to the subject, this autobiographical entry fails to meet important criteria for Wikipedia articles. Dr. Graczynski does not appear to be a notable subject for a biographical entry, especially since no reliable sources focus on him as a biographical subject. Absent independent sources, the article is a work of original research and, moreover, research provided by the subject himself. Deletion of this article in no way casts a shadow on Dr. Graczynski, who seems to be an successful publisher. However, even his major projects, as listed in the article, have not yet merited Wikipedia articles. Thank you for considering and commenting on this nominated deletion. HG | Talk 06:55, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.   —David Eppstein 07:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep One time advisor to the Polish Minister of Health seems notable, if it can be verified.--Sethacus 04:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep pending more information. I think the publishing company is worth an article, and so is at least those of its journals that have made it into Science Citation Index--some of them have, and I consider that notability for a publisher. . Index Copernicus I remember vaguely having heard of, but it's almost impossible to search on Google, for it gets all the articles they publish or index. I did find one mention in a conference proceeding . I will ask about it. DGG (talk) 13:15, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If sources establish notability, fine. But I don't see a need to speculate about potential notability. Maybe it will turn out more relevant to mention him in a Health Ministry article or an article related to his publishing, if such an article eventually gets written. Thanks. HG | Talk 02:31, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * "advisor" to a minister is a very undefined role--that can be really meaningful, or altogether otherwise. I wouldn't consider it notability for anyone without further details, nor would I add the names of all advisors to the articles for the ministries.DGG (talk) 00:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - There is only one mention of him in a reliable source: Dynamic Chiropractic. (November 4, 2004) DC Accepts Invitation to Become Scientific Reviewer. Volume 22; Issue 23; Page 30. -- Jreferee    t / c  14:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jreferee. Note that it's Graczynski is mentioned incidentally in item about a chiropractor. HG | Talk 14:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * He may have wrote this, but it's not independent and doesn't container any biographical material. -- Jreferee    t / c


 * 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.