Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taweesup Apiwattanapong

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. IceKarma&#x0950; 03:35, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Taweesup Apiwattanapong
Non notable biography. jmd 09:52, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BIO. Kappa 12:26, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Great name, though. Pburka 15:51, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - 572 Google hits; and he has written several scientific papers. JoJan 16:09, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Can you demonstrate that his papers have made any difference to the sum of human knowledge? Kappa 16:49, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * So you're asserting that his papers duplicate previous work? Who are you to make that kind of judgment? ··gracefool |&#9786; 14:49, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not concerned about originality, so much as whether anyone takes them seriously or they are completely ignored. However I will withdraw my delete vote in sympathy with your arguments. Kappa
 * Delete. There is no evidence in the article of any claim to notability. Uppland 19:10, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. NN grad student. Suggest he become an elementary school. Sdedeo 19:14, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, grad student at Georgia Tech, with only 47 unique hits. All publications are papers, no books.  User:Zoe|(talk) 22:54, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment- I would personally consider scientific papers to be more "prestigious" than books. Anyone can self-publish a book (remember our friend Figleeeeeeeeeo?). Not everyone can get a paper into The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, for example.--inks 23:49, 18 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete as nn-bio. Academic papers are all well and good, but there's tons of people who have them.  It's no assertion of notability.  Not tagged, since it already was, and was reverted.  IMO the tag was valid, but obviously there's disagreement. Friday (talk) 02:31, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This fellow has not been published in The American Journal of Emergency Medicine so inks' point is irrelevant. Yet another grad student—I wish the best to this fellow but he doesn't get a WP bio at this point. — Phil Welch 03:11, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - academic papers are an assertion of notability. Besides "notability, it's verifiable and wiki isn't paper. It doesn't come under any point at What Wikipedia is not. ··gracefool |&#9786; 14:49, 25 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.