Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael D. Lockshin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by John Z (talk | contribs) at 23:08, 11 January 2009 (Michael D. Lockshin: delsort). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Michael D. Lockshin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Looks Like Advertising; Copied from creating user's page (possible advertiser); See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:WikiPRNYC Christopher Kraus (talk) 21:01, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom.--CyberGhostface (talk) 21:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep and rewrite if necessary to remove any actual copyvio, due to his absolutely clear notability: "Professor of Medicine and Obstetrics-Gynecology at the Weill-Cornell University Medical College " Full professor at one of the most important medicalschools in the world, with multiple additional honors as shown in the article. One of them is editor in chief of Arthritis & Rheumatism, the official publication of the American College of Rheumatology. Editor in cheif of a journal like that shows clear recognition in the field as a major authority. Acting director of NIH's National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases. I wonder if the nominator has actually read the article, or WP:PROF, or is simply assuming that COI is reason for deletion. Ditto for the "per nom" comment. I've removed over a hundred of his minor publications, which are hardly necessary to show the notability, and do give a CV-like tone to the article. I could look for citations to the several hundred peer reviewed articles, but in view of the obvious notability shown by the rest, it hardly seems necessary. DGG (talk) 22:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. John Z (talk) 23:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]