Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard M. Levitan


 * 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 keep. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:42, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Richard M. Levitan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

non notable doctor. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 12:05, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Hampshire-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:43, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:43, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of COVID-19-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete a failure of our not news guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 01:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:ACADEMIC. A Google Scholar search shows that at least eight of his papers (six first author publications) are cited over 100 times. I've expanded the article a bit, but the career section could be expanded to include his research experience. TJMSmith (talk) 01:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:NPROF from highly cited papers.  Several items of coverage in the NYTimes and other news sources surrounding coronavirus probably isn't quite enough on its own, but helps support. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 10:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:ACADEMIC fails. 1) he is not a faculty member; 2) he has NOT received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level; 3) his academic work has NO made a significant impact; 4) he is NOT a relevant author (no textbooks), he co-authored only a few peer-reviewed articles (in medicine this is not a "large quantity of academic work". [Notability Doctors] fails too.Ms4263nyu (talk) 05:42, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. The citation record shows him to be a leading expert on emergency airway management, long before the coronavirus made this specialization extremely relevant. I think he passes WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * @David Eppstein can you define 'leading' expert? After 30 years of career, he is resident at the "Littleton Regional Healthcare" Hospital and adjunct at Dartmouth. He doesn't have a Ph.D., his research is merely anecdotal. It would be interesting to discover why he had lo quit his position at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. Ms4263nyu (talk) 06:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Who cares what his position or credentials are. It's the works that matter. And when I search Google Scholar for emergency airway management, his is one of the first names that comes up. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * @David Eppstein Actually, position and credentials are criteria used to establish notability for academics WP:ACADEMIC. About google scholar, it is not reliable as the results follow your previous searches. If I search "emergency airway management" he is only mentioned once as a second coauthor. Try [PubMed] and use "best match" option, no results. I also checked and I don't find his name in any medial textbook, quite interesting for someone, who, in a wikipedia article is described as a "teaching guru" WP:PEACOCK. So can you explain me how do you define him as a "leading expert"?Ms4263nyu (talk) 07:02, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, per WP:NPROF "... academics may also work outside academia and their primary job does not need to be academic if they are known for their academic achievements." (emphasis original) Wrt your concern about reliability of GS, GS now also lists Web of Science citations (at least from a university ip).  The WoS citations also look solid. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * @Russ Woodroofe But he is an academic, he is a clinical professor. He has publications too. Is he notable? I expressed my doubt by reading the AfD. He is defined as a " pioneering figure" and a "teaching guru" [!!!]. looking at his CV he does not seem a "leading expert" : 1) is he regarded as an important figure by those in the same field? 2) did he receive a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them? In my opinion no. Last but not least, we are academics, we know that if you are resident at HUP and you have a professorship at UPEN you do not move to Littleton Regional Hospital and teach as adjunct because you have solid "WoS citations".Ms4263nyu (talk) 10:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * comment I found intriguing the WP:PUFFERY language and lack of WP:NPOV in the article (eg " pioneering figure" and a "teaching guru"). So I double checked any possible cases of COI or deceptive advertising. Interestingly, Richard M. Levitan is president of Airway Cam Technologies, Inc., the same company which has filled his own patent registrations and which he runs as a president. Ms4263nyu (talk) 09:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   14:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Since this is still going on, I want to expand on the case I made for his notability above. In addition to the strong WP:NPROF C1 case, his airway education materials appear to be widely used, giving a likely pass of WP:NPROF C4.  (Ms4263nyu may not have found the mention in medical books, since references are often to his company Airway Cam or to Rich Levitan.)  I've also added several reviews of his two books to the article, which I believe is a pass of WP:NAUTHOR. I agree that the article has some puffery (which the long-standing editor who created seems to have taken from the news coverage), but AfD is not cleanup. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 18:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Russ Woodroofe: Well done, excellent editing.Ms4263nyu (talk) 21:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. Reasonable pass of WP:Prof. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC).


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.