Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Misha Norland


 * 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. causa sui (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Misha Norland

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Plain old notability. Despite discussion here and at Articles for deletion/School of Homeopathy, there is still a lack of adequate sources to demonstrate notability. A still-living, currently-active practitioner in their field at the claimed level of significance ought to be able to generate some 3rd party sources. These two articles, despite efforts, are still failing to. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 17:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Homeopathy itself is (sadly) notable but all the references for this guy are in a walled garden of non-independent sources, nothing much in the mainstream that I can find. Tricky though - compare with Richard C. Hoagland who is undoubtedly notable within a circle of lunatics, and makes enough of a splash in the world of normality that he deserves an article. andy (talk) 19:17, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, a woeful lack of sources makes the lack of notability entirely clear. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 19:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are some books, not all of which are self-published, and a brief mention in a news article: . 202.124.74.113 (talk) 12:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable per Google News, Google Scholar, or Google Books. Interesting feature of his biography in the article: it describes him as drifting through various non-science-related fields, and then all of a sudden he has "a successful homeopathic practice". No mention of any education or training, just "WHAM! Look at me, I'm a homeopath." Kind of fulfills my worst suspicions about homeopathy. --MelanieN (talk) 15:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as lacking in-depth coverage in reliable, independent third-party sources. Should such sources be integrated into the article feel free to leave a note on my talk page and I'll take another look. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:14, 9 December 2011 (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.