Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dejan Trajkov

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Dejan Trajkov}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Dejan Trajkov}})

Disputed draftification. Subject doesn't appear to pass WP:NPROF. I am not sure being the ex-director of the Institute of Immunobiology and Human Genetics makes them notable but, at the very least, there should be reliable sources to substantiate his notability, which there currently isn't. Hence, their notability status is debatable. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:07, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and North Macedonia. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:07, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
• delete His [https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=IDyCPSQAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao GS profile] indicates one single highly cited paper which doesnt mention him by name as author (rather a consortium). I dont see how this would merit passing WP:NPROF#1; and NPROF#6 is also not applicable with the directorship of an institute. --hroest 19:24, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
• keep his profile, this archived [https://web.archive.org/web/20210226190553/http://www.iibhg.ukim.edu.mk/index.html link] (the link is currently dead) from the Institute for Immunobiology and Human Genetics in 2021 cites him as the Director of the Institute which fulfils NPROF#6. He is also one of the few people that practice Immunology in North Macedonia. Ivanavram (talk) 21:57, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
• {{ping|Ivanavram}} I thought the directorship might meet NPROF#6, but the institute is part of a university, not independent, so it is not met. Therefore, I am advocating to delete. Quuxbazbarfoo (talk) 14:13, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
• Comment. I'd agree that the citations of the position paper are not discriminatory in this context, which leaves top citations 85,62,60,52,49 -- respectable but probably not sufficiently exceptional in a relatively high-citation field. Espresso Addict (talk) 21:28, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
• Delete. I don't see evidence of either WP:PROF or WP:GNG notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
• Delete BLP, fails GNG and NBIO, NPROF. I didn't look into the institute/position, because NPROF states, "any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, are notable." and the article and BEFORE didn't turn up anything that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth to substantiate it, so NPROF is out due to lack of sources. BLPs require strong independent sourcing.  // Timothy :: talk  01:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.