Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyler Alexander Allen

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. MER-C 03:43, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tyler Alexander Allen

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find evidence of the subject meeting WP:ACADEMIC. Adam9007 (talk) 21:42, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, almost certainly speedy. This is an autobiography article about a PhD student containing extensive promotional passages such as about the subject's TedX talk "where he discusses the power of positivity". Although the author has co-authored a paper, for which according to the article he is best-known and represents "a fundamental process...that led to a better understanding of how therapeutic cells exit the circulation when injected or infused into the blood", it was published only three months ago, and has yet to be cited. (It has received a few write-ups in medical news reports, but none I've seen mention or interview this person, only the corresponding author Ke Cheng, an associate professor at NCSU who is the subject's PhD supervisor.) The author claims that "Additional references from non-primary sources have been added." - but this is simply false since every source in the article is authored or co-authored by the subject or their employer NCSU. Blythwood (talk) 21:58, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Blythwood, except it should definitely not have been speedied. Vanity page of young researcher, WP:TOOSOON. Wikishovel (talk) 23:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should not be Deleted The topic of the article is a published scientist who has notable accomplishments, and falls in the WP:ACADEMIC criteria: "The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline." The article does not promote the person in anyway, it simply lists unbiased facts about him. The article does mention some of his notable activities such as his TEDx talk, but a TEDx talk is not promotion but is a prestigious presentation that should be noted. Many other articles on people reference their TED talks, and it is not considered promotional. The fact the discovery of Angiopellosis is recent does not detract from its noteworthy importance to the field of science/biology. It has not been published long enough for it to be cited, but as any published scientist knows, the process of even getting an article published is extremely rigorous within itself and can takes months to years. Additionally, a published articles in a academic journal is not a primary source, and is even stated as a relaiable source in the wikipedia guidelines. The author has is the first author of the published paper, and has several mentions linking him to the discovery ===[[:Tyler Alexander Allen]]=== Taallen92 (talk) 00:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)taallen92[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:11, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Giving TED talks is not enough to establish someone as a notable academic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Self promotional and lacks notability. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:49, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pure self promotion of a PhD candidate. He should come back in ten years when he meets our standards. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 20:41, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. --Animalparty! (talk) 18:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. --Animalparty! (talk) 18:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Joe Roe (talk) 18:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable student autobio. Way WP:TOOSOON, as has been pointed out above. Agricola44 (talk) 20:43, 26 October 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC).[reply]
SNOW Delete as clearly advertising and nothing for the convincing substance needed, certainly enough to delete overall. SwisterTwister talk 19:53, 27 October 2016 (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.