Deletion of Varadaraja V. Raman

Comment: Writing one thing which gets 88 citations over half a century is not a remarkable achievement in physics or the history thereof. The next most highly-cited item according to GS is actually https://aapt.scitation.org/doi/10.1119/1.16384 a book review, and it looks like most if not all of the citations to that are really to the book being reviewed (''The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 2''). I don't see a way to #C1 here. As for the other relevant criteria, I agree with David Eppstein's !vote above
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: He seems more notable (if at all) for turning to woo in his retirement than for any academic work he might once have done. The citation record discussed above is not high enough to convince me of #C1, and being merely a member of various academic societies (rather than, say, a Fellow of those societies) contributes nothing to notability. Most of his books appear to be self-published and unreviewed; being prolific is not enough to be notable. I did find one review each of two of his books, both in the same journal (''Zygon''). With more published reviews from a significantly wider set of viewpoints, I might be willing to reconsider notability under 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: Based on the improvements. The sheer size of this discussion led me to fall into the rabbit hole of taking a deeper dive into the issue. This is one of those cases where the nomination for deletion has driven the improvement of the article and expanded information on the subject to the point where it can be kept and possibly developed further. This is due to:  1) extent of local newspaper coverage (including from cities other than the subject's "hometown"); 2) extent of the subject's publications, of which many have been cited or quoted and at least several were reviewed or commented upon in publications of others; 3) separate discussion of the subject and his views in publications by others; and 4) repeated appearances on the nationally televised PBS series ''Closer to Truth'', in collaboration with numerous other notable figures. There is enough there to support , and likely enough to support . I did not look into the Hindu Encyclopedia or the awards, but they can only add to notability, not detract from it. I didn't have a problem finding coverage. ''Einstein's God: Conversations About Science and the Human Spirit'' was on the first page of Google book hits, for example. Krista Tippett is a well-respected journalist, and in the book preview on Amazon, you can see she has about 20 pages on this subject, including biographical detail, analysis, and an interview. This is also a good source for notability but I don't see that anyone has mentioned it in this discussion at all
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NCREATIVE)