Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reginald Finger


 * 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. Consensus herein is for deletion. North America1000 15:16, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Reginald Finger

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Probably autobiography by Rfinger. The article has no sources other than the subject's personal website. bender235 (talk) 14:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  15:21, 20 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment: The references have the subject quoted as a source of opinion -- very particular and political opinion. That doesn't attest to biographical notability. Instead, this makes for a political voice for the cultural right. However, it's not accurate to say that there are no sources. Hithladaeus (talk) 12:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:41, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:41, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 15:23, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as not notable. A small-scale controversialist whose views have been reported purely as part of discussions of HPV policy. No indication that he himself has done anything of note, and no in-depth coverage of him or his work in reliable sources. Colapeninsula (talk) 10:06, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as failing to demonstrate notability. This article was created in 2006 after the subject of the article was quoted in the New Yorker. This forms that bulk of the initial version of the article and the initial editing may have been autobiographical. Further edits addd more descriptions of controversial opinions around whether introducing certain vaccines would have an effect on the sexual behaviour on parts of the population. Some of the references and the descriptions of controversy were subsequently edited out in December 2009 by an IP editor (despite attempts to undo the deletions). Most of the other references that I turned up are primary sources. The subject of this article has worked in a number of academic and policy settings. The coverage where his name appears does however seem to revolve around the opinion that he was voicing, on behalf of the faith-based organisations that he had links with. Drchriswilliams (talk) 12:14, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - run-of-the-mill university professor and government advisor, article is pure self-promotion (including promotion of his views). Although there are some sources, the subject still fails WP:GNG and any other notability guideline. Kraxler (talk) 17:51, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - short published opinion statements fail to establish notability. A 1-liner quote is not significant coverage. The rest of the article is just standard biographical information with no specific claim of encyclopedic notability. No other independent in-depth coverage found (just a few additional passing mentions and some self-published information). GermanJoe (talk) 11:33, 13 July 2015 (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.