Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wright on Health


 * 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   no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:40, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Wright on Health

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

This blog does not appear to meet notability guidelines, nor does the blog's author. Notability claims are insufficient: "award-winning author" seems to refer to winning an essay prize (link is dead, so I'm not sure) and "student of noted health policy expert" refers to someone with a red link. The blog does not appear to be mentioned by independent sources aside from other non-notable blogs. The only claim that might confer notability is "Wright on Health articles are slated to appear periodically on the popular internet news site The Huffington Post", but I don't see how this alone is sufficient to meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. Peacock (talk) 12:07, 24 October 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep It might qualify under WP:WEB #3, "The content is distributed via a medium which is both respected and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster". The article hadn't been updated in over a year; it said the blog was "slated to appear" at the Huffington Post starting in August 2009. Well, the blog actually does appear at HuffPost nowadays . I am saying "weak" keep because to me, being a regular column at HuffPo does not convey much notability. Neither does an occasional mention of this blog at other blogs such as . But WP:WEB seems to say the HuffPo connection makes it notable. --MelanieN (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Redirect to the article that was just created Brad Wright (blogger). The new title may have to be moved to something more appropriate, but I found that if we fixed the "Wright on Health" article, it would end up being a WP:COATRACK for the author who is the notable part of this.  The new article could also use some cites if someone wants to take some time with it?  I'll add some more to it later.  Pmedema (talk) 06:09, 31 October 2010 (UTC) (Comment for clarity: Pmedema is the creator of the new article about Brad Wright. --MelanieN (talk) 14:37, 31 October 2010 (UTC))
 * Comment I disagree; it should the other way around. The newly written Brad Wright (blogger) article should become a redirect to this one (if it is kept). The blog may meet WP:WEB, but Brad Wright does not meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:ACADEMIC or any other notability criterion that I can see. The only references provided at the new article about the author are self-referential. The fact that he has had a few articles published in medical journals does not make him notable. And all the outside sourcing I can find is about the blog - not about him. --MelanieN (talk) 14:37, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * On the contrary - to be published in The American Journal of Public Health and also to be featured in the "Encyclopedia of Health Services Research" shows that he has been WP:Published and considered notable by these journals. Along with that, to search the web, I'm finding an abundance of other less notable publications of him and from him...  not self published... -  Pmedema (talk) 04:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting that there is something unusual about the American Journal of Public Health, so that every single contributor it publishes is automatically notable? Or is it your opinion that anyone who has ever had any research published anywhere is notable? (I'll give him credit for 3 publications - recently published in Health Service Research, Time Is Money: Opportunity Cost and Physicians' Provision of Charity Care 1996-2005.) That is not in line with the notability requirements at WP:ACADEMIC or WP:AUTHOR, which make it clear that merely getting published is not enough. --MelanieN (talk) 14:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Not everyone, but the recognition from multiple sources to publish him and on a subject that influences government policies in my opinion puts him over the edge into notability - Pmedema (talk) 23:45, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 15:44, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * 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.