The result was Delete and end the madness before someone gets hurt. I realize this debate has not matured to its full 5 days, but 3.5 more days of this will lead to the inevitable deletion as this subject qualifies as a Speedy A7 (bio) anyway. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:((subst:spa|username)) ; suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)) ; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)) . |
Non-notable author. Few Ghits. Books seem largely self published. Xdenizen (talk) 01:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Magoe, the entire point of Wikipedia is too use sources to back up your argument. If you "can't find anything about this guy" then you probably haven't read either the book by Newhouse or the book by Berrouet (listed in the references section of the Hobson-Dupont article), both of which dedicate a chapter to Hobson-Dupont. What are these so called sites you speak of that are "naive medical websites?