Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Hinds (doctor)

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Sam Sailor ^Talk! 00:31, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

John Hinds (doctor)

John Hinds (doctor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Very little coverage of his life, only references are about his death, prior to dying he would not be notable. Murry1975 (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:25, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:25, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:25, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Northern Ireland-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:25, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Keep: Anyone searching for information on him will likely first find a huge number of hits for webpages that had been published following his death. Understandable in the context of there being so many people who were moved by the tragedy of his death. But it would be wrong to make the assumption that he was not notable. I have added a range of reliable sources to the article, published before his death, which give some indication that he enjoyed some significant coverage. He clearly passes WP:GNG. Drchriswilliams (talk) 22:28, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:20, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Keep:Continuing on what was said above, and as the creator of the article, I think that he should be kept. He was a great pioneer in head and neck injuries after motorcycle helmets. It may not be well documented online, but he collected data on the removal of motorcycle helmets after accidents. In the medical community and motorcycle community he enjoyed a lot of notability for his work. He even published a paper on removing helmets and leathers directly after accidents!Rhumidian (talk) 22:44, 2 November 2015 (UTC) • contribs) 00:33, 2 November 2015

• Keep - he was an acknowledged expert in his field, even if not a tenured professor. WP:PROF does not require all elements. Bearian (talk) 20:05, 4 November 2015 (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.