Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Vithoulkas (3rd nomination)

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. As one of the participants summed it up, "Fringe but notable fringe." RL0919 (talk) 21:13, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

George Vithoulkas edit

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:ANYBIO criteria, also fails all 8 of the specific notability criteria for academics. HIs works in Homeopathy are questionable, pretty much the only material published specifically about him is self-published (and therefore, not reliably sourced), and to refer to homeopathy as "medicine" is barely accurate. I assert as nominator, that the subject of this article, despite writing lots of books and being a professor, is not suitable material for Wikipedia. Dane|Geld 20:53, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Dane|Geld 20:53, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Dane|Geld 20:53, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Dane|Geld 20:53, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nominator Dane|Geld 20:59, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Fringe but notable fringe. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. I admit a complete conflict over this, because I personally consider homeopathy to be total clap-trap, and dangerous clap-trap too. But (1) homeopathy is very big business, and is a big influence on millions of people's lives and health. Its biggest figureheads and promoters are therefore notable, no matter how much I dislike what they do. Also (2) if the general public are going to search out information about people like Vithoulkas, it is best that they have WP's balanced view, and not just whatever promotional materials they find from homeopathic organisations. Elemimele (talk) 23:07, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the main argument here is WP:IDONTLIKEIT by @DaneGeld: which is a very poor justification for the AfD. While I am also of the opinion that homeopathy is anti-scientific and doesnt work, this is not a good argument to delete the article. There is a whole biography written about him and he got the Right_Livelihood_Award (alternative Nobel prize). Whats next, delete Kary Mullis because people dont like his views? --hroest 17:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The main argument here is that Vithoulkas does not satisfy any of the criteria for a biographical article and does not meet the requirements for biographies of those in academia. Nothing more. Dane|Geld 21:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - There is a full biographical book about him this book which is not self published (published by Goldmann (publisher) which is quite reputable). I agree he does not pass WP:NPROF, but he clearly satisfies 2 out of 3 criteria of WP:ANYBIO: 1. The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times. and 2. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field.[8] which is covered by a somebody writing a whole book about him. Your nomination is clearly due to bias and not liking homeopathy, I appreciate that and can relate to the sentiment, but these are not suitable arguments for AfD. As pointed out above, it is much better to write the article objectively and write about his critics in the article than to simply delete the article. --hroest 16:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Hannes Röst: - "A well-known and significant award..."; Let's start with that. If I was to ask any person on the street if they'd heard of the Nobel prize, chances are almost everyone would know of it or about it. The "Right Living Award"? I'd defy you to find anyone on the street who knew what that was. I wouldn't call it a well known award, far from it. I'd agree with you that he passes number 2 though and will correct that. I'm leaving this up though. I'll let WP decide on it. Dane|Geld 08:06, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Elemimele. Furthermore, Vithoulkas is the person who introduced homeopathy to the Greek society, which is a notable accomplishment in its own right. ǁǁǁ ǁ Chalk19 (talk) 20:19, 26 July 2021 (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.