Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Konecny

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Konecny

How exactly is Tom Konecny different from all doctors at Mayo clinic (Knowing that most of them have highest degrees), except he has an article in Hospodarske noviny?

Especially when it's obvious that this page was created by an user called "TomKonecny", it seems like a Self Promotion and Autobiography. See Wikipedia:SPIP. I do not think this person is Notable enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dataguard (talk • contribs) 2010/04/07 23:09:54

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

His TV appearances seem minor, so as the Hospodarske noviny appearance —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dataguard (talk • contribs) 00:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This whole article works really hard to give the appearance of notability to someone who is a very early-in-career doctor, but I'll comment on only a few salient points: (1) On the research claims (i.e. "his work has been published in the leading medical and popular journals"), we find 6 articles in WoS (along with a few meeting abstracts and letter-to-the-editor) with total cumulative citations of 18 and h-index of only 3. (2) First Prize in research presentations at an ACP chapter meeting is not a prestigious award at the national level (as described in WP:PROF #2). (3) The article goes on to give a recitation of presumably more senior and famous physicians our subject has worked with, but he does not inherit notability through these channels. (4) Finally, much of the "coverage" listed in the sources are simply conference programs and abstracts, i.e. normal research fodder. This person very well may become notable some day, but is still far from it at the present time. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 15:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Delete Boy, if we included every Mayo doctor... The information presented doesn't suggest to me that he is notable. Considering that a couple of major Mayo figures (one head of department, one head of research group) don't have articles, this guy doesn't seem viable. Yes, I know that each case stands on its own merits, but it is suggestive.David V Houston (talk) 23:06, 10 April 2010 (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.