Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Ho

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 KEEP, unanimously apart from nom. -Splash 01:25, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] David Ho

Not notable scientist SquirrelKabob 22:28, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep Huh? Being Man of the Year in Time Magazine ought to classify as notable in the first place. Apparently well-known researcher. If anything, it should be expanded... Sam Vimes 22:31, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep Time Magazine is garbage, but the only other thing related to Mr. Ho that is is this VFD! UncleFloyd 22:49, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is most likely a bad-faith nomination. Hall Monitor 23:27, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep WTF? Well above the bar of notability. --Etacar11 00:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Time Man of the Year for 1996 for AIDS research contribution. I think there is a clear case for an admin to close this vote early. Capitalistroadster 00:42, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep. Bad faith nomination. Nominator's 12th edit was adding the VFD tag to the article. Kaibabsquirrel 01:06, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree, speedy keep this one. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 08:05, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep The nominator was obviously taking some stupid pills. FunkyChicken! 23:10, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Not notable? He was a Time Person of the Year. If that's not notable... Lordwow 05:11, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep This guy is actually well known and has contributed a lot to medical science.
  • Strong Keep Man of the Year in Time Magazine ought to classify as notable by it self. --Tony Hecht 22:44, 29 July 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.