Deletion of Uffe Ravnskov

Comment: In such a case as this, we should be careful when evaluating the subject's citation record to check #C1. Basically, |our standards for biomedical sources apply, and relying upon Google Scholar (which tallies everything it can find) is a bad move. Going by Web of Science, which records peer-reviewed publications, his h-index is only 20, which in this field isn't enough to stand out as "widely cited". So, the subject fails #C1, and I can't find anything that indicates a pass on any of the other criteria, either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:MEDRS||WP:PROF)

Comment: It seems that the subject ultimately passes  based on their impact in the field
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Some sources exclusively shares his views https://menafn.com/1097654298/Dr-Uffe-Ravnskov-reviews-Cholesterol-is-humans-best-friend but still not convincing enough for passing |GNG
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: This is not an attack on the man's work or his reputation. Notability guidelines are clear, it's not what the academic publishes but what is published about the academic. The subject fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSCHOLAR)

Comment: The article has serious problems with both autobiographical editing and unsourced content. And he's clearly a fringe theorist. But the sources presented in the discussion above are enough to convince me that he's a notable fringe theorist, whether by  or  (or even maybe 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG||WP:AUTHOR)

Comment: GScholar indicates that several of his papers have been cited over 200 times, which is usually taken as meeting . Some of the arguments given above are seriously misguided: for example, there are many respectable open access journals (and ''BMJ Open'' is a very respectable one
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: I haven't seen anything here or in quick searches since this was posted that would satisfy . Everything at the article is just basic stuff from anyone who's done research, gone to graduate school, etc. Being a , I haven't seen any sources showing fringe notability by sources putting their work in context either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NPROF||WP:FRINGEBLP)