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--Ymblanter (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Xiulu Ruan

[edit]

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

No real claim of notability. NOTE: Please review article history; previous versions included a claim of a "world record"; redactions made under WP:BLP. Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 05:56, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, also the references included in the article are just mere listings. There is no in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources to establish notability. I also suspect that the article may be promotional as it was created by a single purpose account with posible conflict of interest as shown by the edit pointed out by Ryk72.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Vipinhari || talk 15:13, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Vipinhari || talk 15:13, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable and no evidence to the contrary. Elaenia (talk) 06:43, 9 March 2016 (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.