Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerhard Medicus

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. Randykitty (talk) 16:15, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gerhard Medicus

[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)

h-index of 6, most cited work has 33 citations, doesn't appear to pass WP:NSCHOLAR, and definitely doesn't meet WP:GNG. Appears to have been written by someone with a close connection. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychiatry-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 14:13, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 14:13, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 14:13, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 14:14, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Productive scientist, but not encyclopedia-notable. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:18, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Citability is low and nothing else indicates passing WP:PROF. Nsk92 (talk) 21:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:31, 21 March 2019 (UTC).[reply]
Don't Delete I have known Gerhard Medicus for over 30 years as a brilliant thinker and theoretician at congresses and in publications. He has managed to establish connections between different humanities disciplines based on the theory of evolution. His innovative thinking has been able to build bridges between disciplines such as biology, ethology, psychology, psychiatry and sociolo-gy. His latest book creates a theoretical basis for a comprehensive connec-tion between body and mind sciences. I think the entry is extremely justified. 217.240.242.198 (talk) 10:31, 25 March 2019 (UTC)Dr. Joachim Bensel[reply]
Don't delete, as far as I understand your system of not adequate articles for en.wikipedia.org it seems difficult to understand for user of others wikis. E. g. Productive scientist, but not encyclopedia-notable: scientists are encyclopedia-notable or how do you want to distinguish which information is important or unimportant for posterity? The family Medicus is an old, in Salzburg rooted family with family members who participated in the creation of the "Hohe Tauern National Park" in Austrian and a historian of the city of Salzburg, his brother, who put this article here online. If an encyclopedia only allows articles about people with a great international reputation, it's not actually a lexicon anymore. The delete mode refers to - at least for me - not completely comprehensible, based on cumbersome guidelines for personal articles. The encyclopedia world exists not only of English-speaking personalities - you should be a little bit more open for the rest of the world. I am an experienced adiminstrators of the "Salzburgwiki" (since 2007) and "EnnstalWiki" (since 2010) in Austria and and I think that I can therefore rate this article as thoroughly worth preserving. Mosaico (talk) 11:55, 25 March 2019 (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.