Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dominique Jan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. fulfils notability cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dominique Jan

Dominique Jan (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Article fails WP:BIO. Article was created by an WP:SPA account with no other edits other than related to columbiasurgery.org. possible copyvio http://asp.cumc.columbia.edu/facdb/profile_list.asp?uni=dj2107&DepAffil=Surgery. Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article.Hu12 (talk) 06:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete No sources independent of the subject. DarkAudit (talk) 14:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. —Espresso Addict (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak delete keep. Full professor. 115 Medline papers, most of which appear to be him, some in well-respected journals eg Gut, Transplantation; also several reviews. Google Scholar finds one paper with >50 citations, and at least five more with >20 citations. Borderline but tipped to delete by the agenda of the creating editor. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. Please note that we should be assuming good faith here, and not deleting any articles based on any supposed agenda by the author. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I've changed my recommendation, as I was probably overly swayed by the sheer number of similar AfDs. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Espresso Addict (talk) 03:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. The citation record probably satisfies criterion 3 of WP:PROF, and the unique approach which the subject introduced satisfies criterion 5. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep It is not a sign of COI that a considerable number of full professors at columbia med school are notable. that's why they get appointed in the first place. DGG (talk) 00:46, 31 January 2008 (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.