Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Mullie

: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. --BDD (talk) 02:13, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

=[[Patrick Mullie]]=

:{{la|Patrick Mullie}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Patrick_Mullie Stats])

:({{Find sources|Patrick Mullie}})

Does not appear to meet notability criteria for academia Wkharrisjr (talk) 12:40, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete not satisfying WP:PROF or WP:GNG; even if the article cited more of his ~23 publications it would not be notable. -- Scray (talk) 19:58, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Delete The Web of Science indeed lists 23 publications for Mullie, which have been cited a grand total of 205 times, giving him an h-index of 6. In high-citation fields like cancer and nutrition research, that's a rather clear failure to meet WP:ACADEMIC. No indication that this meets any other notability guideline either. --Randykitty (talk) 12:20, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

: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.