Deletion of Kenneth Andrew Walsh

Comment: I'm not sure whether the Edman award (for which I added a non-primary source) is enough for #C2 but the citation record is clearly enough for #C1. As for the arguments that we need third-party sourcing: 56 papers x 100 citations each = 5600 sources about Walsh's work. Most of them are probably not sufficiently in-depth but one doesn't need a very high fraction of them to have non-trivial coverage in order to get enough sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Admittedly, I've been off Wikipedia for a few years so I may be rusty. Don't we require the subject be covered in multiple, reliable, third-party sources to satisfy ? Although he appears to have published quite a bit, those are all primary sources. Is there anything third-party covering him and/or his research? (I can't find anything but I may just be missing it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)