Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dennis Fowler

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) 09:48, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Fowler

Article fails WP:BIO. Hu12 (talk) 07:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Part of a larger spam campaign that seeded WP with numerous bios of run of the mill specialists. Eusebeus (talk) 13:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No sources independent of the subject. DarkAudit (talk) 14:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. —Espresso Addict (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Full professor. Over 40 Medline papers for "DL Fowler", mainly seem to be this one, predominantly in well-respected subject-specific journals. Google Scholar finds one paper with >100 citations, and four more with over 20. His Columbia CV claims various laparoscopic firsts,[1] -- while not independent, this seems a reasonably reliable source. Borderline but probably meets WP:PROF for his laparoscopic innovations. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Espresso Addict (talk) 03:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Good citation record and significant firsts satisfy WP:PROF. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep CVs are accepted for bio details, and Medline is an independent source for publications and citations. Its the peer-reviewers who certify the notability independently of what those connected to the subject may say.DGG (talk) 00:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No encyclopedic content. --Funper (talk) 22:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.