Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Taimoorazy

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. BJ^Talk 19:31, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Taimoorazy

Non-notable doctor. Possibly written by the subject or someone related. "Physician of the Year" is a political donation, not a real award. I could not find any coverage in reliable sources when I searched Google Web, News, Books and Scholar. Apoc2400 (talk) 11:46, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now I found this interview in a previous version of the article, but that is all. --Apoc2400 (talk) 11:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 13:26, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete at least for now. His (self-published?) 2008 book has no reviews yet, and the awards listed here and here do not pass WP:BIO for notability. - 2/0 (cont.) 19:52, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not Delete because as an Assyrian he is listed in the category of List of Assyrians, meaning though he may not be known world-wide, he is notable within his own specific ethnic group, the Assyrians. He is also an inventor of the napas device which is used in the medical field. Zayya (talk) 20:26, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He was added there by you. [1]. --Apoc2400 (talk) 21:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did not find any evidence that his invention is particularly widely used, but I am not confident that I was performing the right searches. If it has had a significant impact on the field of anesthesiology, it would be appropriate to discuss its inventor at that (currently nonexistent) article. - 2/0 (cont.) 21:58, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am aware I added him! I think this needs much more research and his article requires expansion. I unfortunately cannot get to it immediately. If the consensus here is to delete the article, I don't particularly have an objection. However, I do object to a quick deletion without further research. Zayya 09:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Delete - No coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. As for holding on to the article for further research, it can copy it to your sub-page and work on it there. I will note that as a minimum, establishing notability with some basic research should have been done when the article was created. -- Whpq (talk) 13:07, 17 July 2009 (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.