Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheldon Herzig


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 03:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Sheldon Herzig

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable individual. Cannot find any substantial coverage of him in reliable sources as required to meet WP:BIO. SmartSE (talk) 18:22, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I disagree. Many notable academic journals and conferences have been mentioned, as well as established academic universities and philanthropic endeavors. Please reply on my talk page, as I have completely redone this page and believe it provides more than substantial evidence to Dr. Herzig's notability.BlakeRM (talk) 19:13, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 22:16, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 22:16, 4 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Has not received SIGCOV in RS. I also do not think the subject meets WP:NACADEMIC, though they hold the post of Clinician Teacher at the Department of Ophthalmology & Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, and have authored a number of papers in ophthalmology journals. Hrodvarsson (talk) 01:54, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete as hopelessly promotional. For example I checked out the source provided for the statement, "Herzig has been recognized as a leader in the use of laser technologies in refractive surgery", and found that all that it said was that he had been "honoured" by a hospital staff association for unstated reasons along with dozens of other people. The rest of the article is written in the same vein. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:04, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Doctors are typically not notable unless they are recognized as particularly significant or innovative in their specialty (i.e. WP:NACADEMIC); don't see that here. OhNo itsJamie Talk 20:38, 12 April 2018 (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.