This article was nominated for deletion on 16 October 2017. The result of the discussion was delete.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article on Charles F. Lynch serves as a comparison of the professor test (WP:NPROF) against other standards of notability. For fun, I use the example of cricket. Under WP:NCRIC, a player who stepped once onto a first class pitch is assumed notable and eligible for an article. A single scorecard is all that is required. No press coverage is needed. We don't even need to know the cricketer's given name. To wit: S. Dhanayake
Dr. Lynch is an eminent cancer researcher. He and his staff have tracked every cancer case in Iowa for the last half century. He and the AFS staff track the history of 90,000 farm workers since 1990 to see what maladies afflict them. He is, apparently, happy with his job, and doesn't spend time polishing his resume or trumpeting his own success. Lynch and his teams work silently with no apparent self-promotion. He doesn't volunteer to take interviews. As a result, press coverage is skinny, like this [1]. It's easy to find a half dozen reasons to dump this article:
Lynch doesn't sit in a named professorial chair.
No significant impact ... demonstrated by independent reliable sources.
No "highly prestigious award" or "elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society."
The citation counts you provided did not come our only two trusted sources: Clarivate or Scopus.
Any one of these complaints may be used to support a speedy delete under G4.
The implications are clear: an egghead who publishes relentlessly and participates in long term scientific studies must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to belong in Wikipedia. A cricketer or dart-thrower with a single scorecard is a shoo-in. At the last AfD, the discussion turned on whether Lynch was a (full) Professor or Distinguished Professor. Further, there was discussion of whether his directorship of the AFS or the Iowa Cancer Study was academic or not. If it wasn't, the argument went, regular press articles were required. It strikes me that this is wikilawyering intended to keep dart-throwers in and academics out. I apologize in advance if this observation is interpreted as POINTY. You can watch his Youtube. He's not especially charismatic. Nevertheless, other academics appreciate his work enough to cite it 30,000 times. Consider that before you select WP:CSD.
