Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milo Keynes

:{{la|Milo Keynes}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Milo_Keynes Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Milo Keynes}})

Another great-grandson of Darwin, and nephew of Keynes, who does not seem notable in his own right. I cannot find significant coverage. Tacyarg (talk) 02:26, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:51, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:51, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:51, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:51, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

• Possible Firm keep His 1984 book about Lydia Lopokova was reviewed in major newspapers. I haven't time just now to look further, but I suspect the article may just need an expand / source.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:44, 2 March 2018 (UTC) KEEP. Take a look at a JSTOR, gScholar or gBooks, our boy Milo appears to have been a bit of a polymath, certainly his books on the history of science, on art, and about his relatives are cited by other authors, as are his scientific research papers. In addition, he would write the occassional odd essay, like this erudite, footnoted letter to the editor that appeared in The Lancet based on testing some of Napoleonic body part to solve a old debate (Did Napoleon die from arsenical poisoning? Milo Keynes. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(94)93046-5. 276) I admit to not having read past the headlines, and, therefore, I cannot say what Napoleon died of, but Keynes' letter to the editor was discussed in literally scores of newspapers and journals as part of a vigorous debate on the subject that raged across the Anglosphere and in other languages. He is cited so widely and on so many topics that it seems clear that he needs a better article. Note that our article on him is pretty much a sutb, written more than a decade ago. The text appears to be accurate, but it emphasizes genealogy (which may have misled Nom into assuming that all Kaynes had going for his was distinguished forebears - which turns out not to be the case at all.) Article is badly in need of an expansion and better sourcing.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:01, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
• Keep NOTINHERITED is one thing - but this seems to be no more than DELETE_BECAUSE_INHERITED Andy Dingley (talk) 23:27, 6 March 2018 (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.