- 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. The Bushranger One ping only 10:45, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
David Steenblock
- David Steenblock ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:BLP. Sources are Quackwatch, which is a reliable source, but not enough to satisfy prominent and independent coverage needed for BLP. Article also seems to be a resumé and self-promotional despite sources cited that are critical. Delta13C ( talk) 02:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete for now and restart later if better as I only found some links at Books, browsers, Highbeam and Scholar but nothing surprisingly better. The article is not entirely acceptable as it could better (especially making the solid independently more firmer) and I'm simply not seeing that. Notifying DGG who asks to be notified of academics subjects and may have some more insight about this familiar area. SwisterTwister talk 06:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. non notable. He's not an academic. He's a physician who has written some non notable popular books. DGG ( talk ) 06:15, 30 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.
- 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. The Bushranger One ping only 10:45, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
David Steenblock
- David Steenblock ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:BLP. Sources are Quackwatch, which is a reliable source, but not enough to satisfy prominent and independent coverage needed for BLP. Article also seems to be a resumé and self-promotional despite sources cited that are critical. Delta13C ( talk) 02:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 06:35, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete for now and restart later if better as I only found some links at Books, browsers, Highbeam and Scholar but nothing surprisingly better. The article is not entirely acceptable as it could better (especially making the solid independently more firmer) and I'm simply not seeing that. Notifying DGG who asks to be notified of academics subjects and may have some more insight about this familiar area. SwisterTwister talk 06:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. non notable. He's not an academic. He's a physician who has written some non notable popular books. DGG ( talk ) 06:15, 30 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.