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 and clean up. Bearian (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Francisco J. Blanco (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

A scientist CV without any notability Xabier Cid (talk) 09:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More reasons to delete

• This is an orphan page
• Data are not updated
• There are no notable contributions of this scientist.
• The article was created by an user who only created this article: possible Conflict of interest. --Xabier Cid (talk) 10:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The notability guideline for scientists is WP:ACADEMIC, but he doesn't seem to qualify under any of its criteria. Google indicates that he has various journal publications and such, as any academic would, but there's no material that I can find to indicate that he's a significant expert in the field or that he's made important advances in biology. Nasica (talk) 11:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Although the fact this article was created by a single-purpose account is not by itself a reason to consider deletion or even suspect a conflict of interest, it remains that this man's research seems highly specialized and of no immediate interest to everyday life. No notability is otherwise asserted. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 12:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete probable vanity article Dreamspy (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even more reasons: the other main editor of the article was User:Kcops7, who has edited only two entries: Francisco J. Blanco and Beta hairpin, where he/she added only information concerning Francisco J Blanco. --Xabier Cid (talk) 20:03, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment He is indeed a genuine scientist as this article--with his picture--shows. But its a very specialised field. Anyway, I've added this source to the article. Artene50 (talk) 04:41, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep Web of Science lists more than 150 publications, cited thousands of times (3794, to be exact). h-index of 33. One article on that hairpin stuff was cited 269 times alone. (Note: there may be more than one "Blanco FJ". If I limit the search to the 35 structural biology papers, I still get 2262 citations and an h-index of 25). Structural biology is NOT "of no immediate interest to everyday life", even though I agree that it is highly specialized (but then, which field of science is not...). Structural biology is currently one of the hottest fields in biology and findings in this field have huge implications for health care (such as development of new cancer drugs, to mention just one thing). Article does not contain any exaggerated claims or peacock terms, nor is it very detailed and therefore probably not created by the subject himself. I see no indication at all of COI or of this being a vanity article. Article should be expanded and provided with more sources. I'll add the citation data as a strat. --Crusio (talk) 17:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Crusio. I also did the WoS and Medline searches; the latter one is more comprehensive and shows 62 articles, with a number of them with citation hits in the hundreds each. Similarly, see GoogleScholar[1], with top hits of 394, 264, 215, 124, etc. Satisfies WP:PROF. I would have liked, however, to find an current website for this person or at least some indication of where they are now, since the affiliation given in the WP article seems to be out of date. Nsk92 (talk) 20:43, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• There's a Francisco Blanco García working for El Complejo Hospitalario Universitario "Juan Canalejo" in La Coruña, Spain according to an org chart here, and several papers by FJ Blanco associated with that institution here. "Francisco J. Blanco Garcia" gets a reasonable number of ghits. I'm guessing they're the same as the subject of the article. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could be, but I am getting an uncomfortable feeling that there may be more than one person here with similar names. I thought that F J Blanco who is the subject of this article works in cancer research. The first article in the link you provided is about some clynical study in arthritis research. Does not sound that close to me, but it is possible that it is the same person... Nsk92 (talk) 01:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't sure about the arthritis stuff either, so I excluded it when I concentrated on the structural biology work. Those results make him pass WP:PROF, I feel, especially since he's still relatively young and because they are kind of like a lower bound of these citation data. --Crusio (talk) 08:36, 7 July 2008 (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.