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. - brenneman 02:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Schultz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Delete - not every medical doctor is entitled to a Wikipedia article (and neither is every Who's Who entry...). The information supplied in this article and the results of several Google searches I've conducted fail to yield evidence that Schultz meets the criteria outlined in WP:BIO. The book he wrote, Office Practice of Skin Surgery, has 49 Ghits, mostly coming from his official website and Amazon, and I did not see any independent/third party reviews. "Dr Bryan Schultz" yields only 16 Ghits from the same four sources, and "Bryan Schultz MD" yields 28 from 3 sources. Only some of the "Bryan Schultz" sources are relevant (here). The article also mentions that Schultz has done research. I used this generator to compute his h number (which is the number of times your paper with the median number of citations has been cited by others), and searches for "Bryan C Schultz," "Bryan Schultz," "Schultz Bryan C," and "Schultz Bryan" under biology and medicine all yielded zero. (Full professors at research universities well into their careers often have h numbers in the 20s or higher). Fabricationary 23:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• use rational criteria The source for scientific articles by a physician is PubMed. The way authors are listed there is by name and initials, so he is "Schultz BC" He has written 11 articles listed there, one in Journal of the American Medical Association; the latest in 1998. His book was published in 1985 and it is therefore not surprising that almost all the entries in Google were used book dealers. The H-number generator works with Google Scholar, and more than half of Google Scholar's content is from 2000+, while all his articles were earlier. But in any case the first step is to use the name in the standard format for the field, and if you do the h-number is 2, not zero. (There is no magic number, and no intelligent database.) He is an associate professor in a major university, but it's an associate clinical professor, which is a distinction most medical specialists get with time.

But adding all of this up, it does not amount to notability in a general sense, though he may well be notable among Chicago area dermatologists.

Delete-- DGG 08:46, 2 January 2007 (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.