Deletion of Peter Forster (geneticist)

Comment: for lack of a valid deletion rationale. The nominator's "promotional" nomination is a classic Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Arguments without arguments|argument without an argument: here it appears only to mean that we have an article that mentions the accomplishments of its subject; by referring to the motivation for the article and not to its content it is an ad-hominem argument and vioaltes ; and it fails to refer to  or any other notability guideline. In any case the subject clearly passes #C1 (highly cited pubs with the top one being cited 3500+ times on Google scholar) and #C3 (member Leopoldina
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF||WP:PROF||WP:PROF)

Comment: Very clear pass of rof#C1 at least. Nominator is advised to study rof and carry out efore before making further nominations
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P||WP:P||WP:B)