Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Radley (surgeon)


 * 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. –MuZemike 21:14, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Simon Radley (surgeon)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable biography of a consultant at a hospital. Also there is a conflict of interest.  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  16:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep as he is clearly published multiple times, but clear all original research and fluffy material from article. COI (autobiography) aside, he seems to cleanly pass WP:GNG.  Dennis Brown (talk) 16:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Typical CV for a succesful surgeon. This article does not explain why he should have an article more than the several hundred British surgeons who have a similar career. I have a number of publications to my name. Does that make me notable? No. Doesn't pass WP:PROF. JFW &#124; T@lk  20:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. He is a surgeon, and is only distinguished by the fact that he has published slightly more articles than might be the norm for a surgeon.  But there is no claim of notability in his field, and if one was to assess him as an academic he gets nowhere near the requirements for WP:ACADEMIC. --Legis (talk - contribs) 09:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:ACADEMIC. Most of his publications have multiple authors and are not heavily cited. The article has dozens of references but they are almost all simply links to articles he has published - in other words they are neither independent nor are they about him, so they do not contribute to WP:BIO. --MelanieN (talk) 16:08, 15 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.