Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas E. Levy

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 delete. PeaceNT 12:34, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thomas E. Levy

Thomas E. Levy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)
  1. WP:PROF: A simple pubmed search on "Levy TE" demonstrates only one publication and a Google Scholar search yields the same paucity of publications.
  2. WP:PROF: The standard of "this academic is more notable than the average college instructor/professor" is often cited. Indeed, Thomas Levy is less notable than the average college instructor as he has less publications and only self-published references.
  3. WP:V: Specifically, WP:SPS. Other than the one minor paper he has in Altern Med Review, all the other sources to this article are from his own books, or to his website.
  4. WP:FRINGE: And I quote, In order to be notable, a non-mainstream theory should be referenced extensively, and in a serious manner, in at least one major mainstream publication. One minor publication in a small Alt Med journal and self-published books hardly count as extensive, serious, or major.
  5. WP:SPAM: All this referencing to the individual's own buisness page and "Dr. Levy's newest book, has an Amazon.com sales rank of #73,329" smacks of self promotion.

Djma12 (talk) 23:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. I've just re-read WP:Fringe and I think this fails that criterion. The books listed as published by LivOn Books are the only two books that publisher issues -- self-publishing. Xlibris Corporation is a self-publishing company. The McGraw-Hill book is from an imprint devoted to "alternative therapy" and I don't think any of the books I saw would pass WP:Fringe; similarly Hampton Roads. A website called www.quackwatch.org has "Journal of Advancement in Medicine" and "Alternative Medicine Review" on its list of "Nonrecommended periodicals", which seems to dispose of the two "peer-reviewed journals" on the list of publications. (Journal of Advancement in Medicine changed publishers and became less authoritative some years ago, according to my research.) In addition, as per the nomination above, my Google search didn't reveal any extensive and/or serious references in any major mainstream publication -- by anyone else except Dr. Levy. Also according to WP:Fringe, "Efforts of fringe-theory inventors to shill on behalf of their theories, such as duplicitously offering self-published books for sale under the guise of "references", should be strongly frowned upon". And I think referencing your own Amazon.com sales rank "smacks of self-promotion", also as per the nom. All things considered, I can't support this article being in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Accounting4Taste (talk • contribs) 00:00, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
  • It's not selfpromotion, as I, who entered the sales rank, am not Dr. Levy, nor am I his agent. my understanding is that for some authors, amazon sales rank establishes notability. I agree that as it stands, this article doesn't establish notability.--Alterrabe 21:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete- well spotted.JJJ999 00:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as given, unless there can be found references to other people talking about the work.DGG (talk) 08:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as DGG writes, unless someone adds suitable references.--Alterrabe 21:22, 5 October 2007 (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.