Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suzanne Goh


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  05:17, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Suzanne Goh

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

BLP, fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in article are primary written by subject, BEFORE showed nothing from WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV which addresses the topic directly and in-depth. WP:BLPs require strong sourcing  // Timothy :: talk  21:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: For the reasons stated in the nomination. I culled all the ridiculous puffery, and there's now no evidence of notability. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 21:23, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Medicine.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:40, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:40, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment, leaning Keep. (As an aside, I very much dislike the habit of gutting an article and then taking it to AfD looking like a microstub. I'd suggest participants look in the history for a fuller picture of this researcher; some of the material removed seems unproblematic to me. In particular the fact the subject was a Rhodes scholar is confirmed by many Proquest hits.) Just looking at GS, there seem to be some fairly highly cited research papers (287,178,169,97,80), perhaps enough to meet WP:PROF though it's a high-citation field. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:10, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Proquest finds a short review of her coauthored book Spectacular Bond: Reaching the Child with Autism, though I think it's in the Washington Post blog, not the newspaper (Williams, Mari-Jane. New parenting books focus on food allergies, autism and why there is no perfect mom. The Washington Post (Online) 2013). Also quite a lot of Proquest coverage of her company in the San Diego Business Journal. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:52, 26 October 2023 (UTC)


 * There was copyvio in the history, which I have now marked for revdel; the majority of the content came from here. These two citations were also in the history and not the current article, so I'm leaving them here so they don't get lost with the revdel. Skarmory   (talk •   contribs)  01:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, that's a shame. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:52, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:13, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. On Newspapers Extended I found articles mentioning the Rhodes scholarship and a 2023 Boston Globe article mentioning her in connection with symptoms of early onset autism, but not SIGCOV on her. I share @Espresso Addict's disdain for the practice of gutting a page before or in the midst of an AfD; it makes it harder for editors to do research and looks like there's a thumb on the scale. She's also quoted here from her MitoMedical days. I wish I had access to the pre-revdel versions. BBQboffin (talk) 17:37, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Scopus has her h-index at 13 which is low compared to others, but on her top-cited papers on Google Scholar she's the lead author, so is that a pass for WP:NPROF? BBQboffin (talk) 19:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete. She does not pass NPROF and the "average professor test", her citations on GS and Scopus are similar to other PIS (with 3 papers with 100+ citations) at this career stage in her field which is a high citation field. Also, an early career award like the Rhodes generally doesnt contribute to NPROF notability. It seems she also doesnt pass GNG. --hroest 15:23, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:Prof not yet passed. Looks like commercial puffery. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:26, 6 November 2023 (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.