Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Charles Edwards


 * 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. Keepers point to his contribution to a frequently cited paper as evidence of notability, but there appears to be no reliable coverage about this guy, necessary for writing a biography. Flowerparty ☀ 07:36, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Michael Charles Edwards

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

Deletenon notable No disrespect intended, but Dr. Edwards is not a particular noteworthy practicioner in our field. Criteria for inclusion as a medical professional should be reserved for those with extraordinary career accomplishments, notable academic or professional standing, or other claims of celebrity status or accomplishment outside the field of medicineDroliver (talk) 19:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep In this case, his 7 publications from the basic science years are associated with some spectacular work: His most important publication "P57(kip2), a structurally distinct member of the p21(cip1) cdk inhibitor family, is a candidate tumor-suppressor gene" by Martsuka S, Edwards MC, BAI C, Parker S, Zhang PM, Baldini A, Harper JW, Ellledge SJ, in Genes and Development 9(6) 650-662 (1995) has been cited the remarkable number of 682 times according to Web of Science. The other papers of his have been cited 216, 154, 107, 75, 44, 41 times. DGG (talk) 03:46, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Needs more research. In the current state, the article documents the work of a professional whose work product results in publication in journals. This may or may not mean that the person mets the inclusion criteria. Need to look for other indications of the person having significant impact in their field. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 16:35, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Please note that Dr. Edwards is not first author (usually the one who does the work) or last author (the researcher who is the boss) on any of the publications. This MD's record is very thin to suggest notability of any sort.Droliver (talk) 04:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per DGG. His accomplishments seem pretty significant and can be verified. Bearian (talk) 17:39, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment perhaps weak delete As noted, he is a co author on those papers, meaning anything from moderate to almost no contribution, yet the text attributes great discoveries to him. Right now it reads as a self promotion article, but that can be fixed if there is more evidence of notability.  Also, is he the same person mentioned here [] ?Fuzbaby (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep His work is clearly notable, as DGG has stated.  D r e a m Focus  08:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. The idea that all those cites were due to his work is certainly not true, Stephen J Elledge is the one with the notability here, he was the corresponding author, senior author, lab head. Edwards is not a notable geneticist, or there'd be secondary sources to show. The article puffs up his work in the Elledge lab. He is definitely not notable as a plastic surgeon. Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Um.... is this the same Michael Charles Edwards, a surgeon also based in Texas and California who also studied Medicine at Baylor:. He seems to have run into some trouble as of last month: "Restrictions: prohibited from engaging in the solo practice of medicine; shall abstain completely from alcohol & possession of controlled substances, this prohibition does not apply to medications lawfully prescribed to Dr. Edwards by another practitioner for a bona fide illness or condition; submit to biological fluid testing & continue with his psychotherapy treatment during the pendency of this order." Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Checking some of the refs shows that the subject has written some papers, but there is no available secondary source asserting the subject is notable. Some of the links appear to not mention the subject (instead, they discuss the topic allegedly associated with the subject). We read "working in a laboratory of a geneticist Stephen J. Elledge", and Elledge is notable, but notability is not inherited so there is no evidence that the subject is notable. Given the "cited...682 times" and the "discoveries and innovations" I find it remarkable that no secondary source is available, and I infer that the claims of the subject's involvement are not sustained. Johnuniq (talk) 08:07, 27 June 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.