Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doc Childre

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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. All the (policy-based) Delete !votes correctly indicate the need for independent sources, but then Green Cardamom does indeed identify sufficient independent sourcing published in notable journals to meet WP:AUTHOR #3, satisfying the thing the Deletes say is lacking. I agree with MelanieN that the article in its current state needs significant work, but as it's often said, "AFD is not for cleanup" Zad68 02:36, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doc Childre

edit
Doc Childre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article cites no external sources whatsoever to show the subject's notability - only the author's own website and books. I was tempted to speedy-delete, but he does have one book published by an affiliate of HarperCollins. On balance, though, without sources, I don't think this meets WP:BIO. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:09, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I noticed this on NawlinWiki's talk page, and my first reaction was that this is a puff piece. All the sources were written by Childre. I looked on Google for sources, and everything seems to be press release, commercial, or forum/blog in nature. Chris857 (talk) 15:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's transparently commercial, basically an ad. Epaminondas of Thebes (talk) 17:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:01, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:37, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete-- need independent sources. Lesion (talk) 17:57, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Doc Childre is the WP:AUTHOR of many books[1] that have received book reviews in reliable sources, per WP:AUTHOR #3 "The person has created .. a well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of .. multiple independent periodical articles or reviews."
Other Sources NewsBank shows 34 newspaper articles. Most of them are mentions of Childre's books and/or think tank though not dedicated reviews. A couple examples:
  • Gracie Bonds Staples. "Living with your choices Course of action", The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, October 30, 2010. Quote: "Doc Childre, the internationally renowned stress expert, said.."
  • Portia Berrey, "The heart has its own brain.literally." Denver Examiner, September 21, 2009. Summarizes Childre's position on the "brain in the heart".
  • Media sources at the HearthMath website has 100s of "in the media" sources archived (I have not looked through them for reliable sources about ChildreP).
-- Green Cardamom (talk) 20:33, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've dropped these into the references section for now so they don't get lost. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 01:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The subject may be notable (a borderline case), but if the article is kept it needs major editing. Puffery statements like "His works on child development and strategies for dealing with stress have been widely accepted by the medical community[4] as a leading tool for stress reduction and healthier living" and "Childre has dedicated his life to the development of ideas and practices that assist people in their own understanding of how to cope with stress" have got to go. Maybe the article could be stubified until it is rewritten in encyclopedic fashion, but I'm not sure how that could even be done; I could find virtually no biographical information about him from independent sources (as opposed to his own claims from his website and his publishers). Overall I'm leaning toward Delete for lack of sufficient biographical information to base a biographical article on. Maybe an article on Heartmath would be more appropriate. --MelanieN (talk) 16:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:05, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We should vote on the topic, not the current state of the article. Are there enough sources to make a 1-sentence stub? See sources I listed above. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 16:33, 12 October 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Doc_Childre&oldid=1137792703"