Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Sullivan (rehabilitation academic)


 * 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. The question whether QSO is a sufficient award for notability is interesting, but might be well outside the AfD scope.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:05, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Martin Sullivan (rehabilitation academic)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. (not MJ Sullivan from Duke University Medical Center). Award is not major. Lacks coverage about him in independent reliable sources. One of a glut of of articles on seemingly non notable St Peter's College old boys. Wikipedia is not a webhost for a collection bios of a schools former students. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:19, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:31, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:32, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Doesn't stand out from the next academic - SimonLyall (talk) 01:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per Queen's Service Order. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:12, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Is QSO enough? It's well down the list of NZ Honours and Commonwealth honours have a poor precedence at AfD.  OAM, deleted, OAM, deleted, AM, deleted, BEM, deleted, OAM, deleted, OAM, deleted, AM, keep, AM, keep. Looks like by themselves there is a bad record and only they are kept with other supporting evidence. Wikipedians' notice board discussion. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:28, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * In my experience / opinion it is. OSM means things like this if you dig enough. Also see this, this, this and this. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:46, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:38, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:38, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep importance in relation to disability care and community role evidenced by award. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rick570 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete Unless QSM is the highest national civilian award, which I do not think it is. Otherwise there is nothing specific that would meet our usual standards.  DGG ( talk ) 02:47, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Queens Order is not the highest but is one of the highest, see New Zealand Royal Honours System, notes at bottom of table for ordering. WP:ANYBIO says "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor". As User:Rick570 says, the award is evidence of significant role in disability care. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 18:41, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it's the lowest general civilian award, & not enough. Johnbod (talk) 04:27, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The Queen's Service Medal is the lowest. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 05:52, 18 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - I added one more source. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 04:45, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Despite the incompetence of the writing of the article a search for "M J Sullivan" in GS gives enough cites for WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:01, 14 November 2013 (UTC).
 * First hit is for Michael J. Second MJ Sullivan from Duke. Third Michael. Fourth Duke. Fifth Duke? Sixth Duke. Which good ones are from this Sullivan? duffbeerforme (talk) 06:23, 14 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per deleters. Johnbod (talk) 04:27, 18 November 2013 (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.