Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven A. Vasilev


 * 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 Cheers,  I 'mperator 13:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Steven_A._Vasilev
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Notability of subject not established; reads like a vanty resume and not an encylopedic biography Rhode Island Red (talk) 15:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Chief of Obstetrics and Gynecology  at the Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center., a   major med center; this is equivalent to chairman of department at a major university. Needs check for actual publication and cites, but certainly not the least a vanity resume--the other direction if anything, too sparse to correctly demonstrate the notabilityDGG (talk) 19:21, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's sparse now becuase I trimmed down the "vanity" and non-notable portions. IMO notability is contingent on being discussed widely by secondary sources. I don't see any secondary sources that establish his notability. I don't believe that every department head at every university in the world is automatically considered notable. Vasilev is also categoried among US OB/GYNs, but if you inspect the people inlcuded in those lists, they have all made significant historical contributions to the field. The bar sems to have been lowered considerably by inluding Vasilev among these other far more notable physicians. Rhode Island Red (talk) 17:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I am also concerned that the subject himself, Vasilev, penned his own biography, whih runs counter to WP guidelines. The author essentially pasted a resume on WP, which is inappropriate and non-encycopedic, and then the WP entry was linked from various blog sites operated by the author, which are of very dubious quality and reliability. Rhode Island Red (talk) 17:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Gbooks finds two books by Vasilev, GScholar finds about 30 papers, Ghits several hundreds, mostly relating to his publications, and some relating to websites associated with him.  Article was created by User:Svasilev, so WP:COI is quite likely and while an autobiography generally results in a poor article, it is not a valid deletion reason per se.  After being trimmed by nom. the article appears reasonably NPOV.  Due to the subjective nature of WP:N a pass can be debated, to my standards it's a pass, definitely passes WP:V.  The is a clear claim to notability, and I consider it likely that sources can be found. Power.corrupts (talk) 18:12, 17 June 2009 (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.