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.
Nominating on behalf of subject. Rational is "This bio was posted without my knowledge, approval or input. I do not want a bio bio posted, which is my right as a private individual. The individual posting this does not know me or anything about me. The bio is filled with intentional errors. For my employment, it lists positions that I have never held at companies I have never worked for. This bio lists academic affiliations that I have never had. It states that I initially published about exosomes in the 1980's, when it was actually in the 1970's. It states that I am affiliated with journals that I have no knowledge of or interactions with. If these journals are using my name, it is without my permission." Mdann52 (talk) 16:40, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per previous recent AfD's outcome (speedy keep) that the individual is notable. If there are any errors in the article, they should be corrected using reliable sources, of course, but I'm getting the notion that this person is throwing up a lot of things to see if anything sticks to avoid potential professional embarrassment. No individual has a right to request a removal of an article about themselves at any rate. However, he can certainly point us to reliable sources for fixing any errors. Stevie is the man!Talk • Work16:52, 18 January 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.
