Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerald Gartlehner

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 15:42, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Gartlehner[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable physician, lacks indepth sources Sanketio31 (talk) 09:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sanketio31 (talk) 09:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just added references for Gartlehner's function at RTI International [1] and at Université de Paris [2] --Himbernd (talk) 12:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

speedy keep, it looks like insufficient WP:BEFORE, the subject has an h-index of 58 and 17k citations in the literature. Clearly passes WP:PROF#1. --hroest 14:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. NPROF is one of very few SNGs that supersede GNG, so lack of SIGCOV is irrelevant here. JoelleJay (talk) 19:53, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
keep, easy pass of NPROF#1. He might also pass GNG, as there are a whole lot of results in google news with his name (mostly in German).--Eostrix (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 15:20, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - yes, he clearly meets WP:NSCHOLAR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:13, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Apart from WP:PROF#C1 considerations mentioned above, I believe the subject also qualifies under WP:PROF#C7, as "The person has had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity. GoogleNews[3] shows that his views as a medical expert, particularly in relation to COVID-19, are frequently discussed in the media in relation to public policy. GoogleNews has 600+ hits for him and I don't think any of those are false positives. Nsk92 (talk) 10:23, 27 April 2021 (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.