Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roderick O'Brien

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Roderick O'Brien

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

Appears to fail WP:ACADEMIC / WP:GNG. bobrayner (talk) 21:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:19, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:19, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP:PROF. JFW | T@lk 21:34, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Appears to be a psychiatrist in private practice (although you can't tell that from the article), and works or worked for a for-profit home-care services provider (although it is listed under "volunteer work"). No indication that he passes WP:BIO or WP:PROF. Article gives no indication of why he is notable. Looks like PROD was declined by the author. --MelanieN (talk) 21:29, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 21:41, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Article may need refocused, but it appears that the subject may meet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics) and should be kept on that basis alone until more can be determined. Citations of his academic contributions are referenced, and several more appear to be listed at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=O'Brien%20RS%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9827510. If these are important in this field, then it's a strong keep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celtechm (talk • contribs) 23:26, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete He is the director of Caring for People (CP), a private home care company. He is not an academic and only has co-authored a few journal articles. The other articles that Celtechm found on www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov are from two different RS O'Briens. One is a physicist in Australia. One of the journal articles listed in Wikipedia O'Brien article is from the Australian O'Brien. Not close to meeting WP:ACADEMIC. Previously, the article contained references, but they were to blogs O'Brien has written on sites owned by CP. There are no independent, reliable references. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Bgwhite (talk) 08:08, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This isn't even close. He fails all notability tests. The article reads like an employee's bio page on a company website, written by a PR or HR person. It even says, "While at Notre Dame, he was a member of the Notre Dame Glee Club and served as the Vice President of the Glee Club in 1994 & 1995." ;) We won't even discuss all the NPOV issues. This is what you called a puffed-up BLP. --76.189.114.163 (talk) 17:05, 2 August 2012 (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.