Deletion of Amit Sood

Comment: His citation counts would be good for a technical topic in a low-citation field, but are nothing special in pop-psych (which is what I think this is more than medicine). He has written a lot of books but I could find zero reviews. And I found a lot of churnalism publicity-pieces, or worse publicity pieces about other publicity pieces https://www.postbulletin.com/newsmd/wellness/6732324-Former-Mayo-doctor-featured-on-Sunday-Morning like this announcement for a TV episode, but only one piece that looks both reliable and in-depth (while still being a publicity piece): https://www.startribune.com/mayo-clinic-doctor-has-your-prescription-for-happiness/322970311/ this one in the Star Tribune. So although there are hints towards , , and , none of them is convincing to me
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:AUTHOR||WP:GNG)

Comment: As per all passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC)

Comment: Citation counts run high in medicine, and the subject's do not stand out as exceptional, so I'm not seeing a pass of #C1. (The Google Scholar results include some false positives, like authors with different middle initials, and the genuine results feature long author lists with no indication that Sood himself took a leading role.) A couple mid-level administrative positions at the Mayo Clinic aren't the university-president-or-equivalent status that #C6 asks for. "Fellow" isn't the ACP's highest level of membership; the parallel to an IEEE or APS Fellow would be a "master" at ACP. So, #C3 is out. On top of all that, in order to describe accomplishments in the subject's field, we would need sources that comply with 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:PROF||WP:PROF||WP:MEDRS)

Comment: per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC)

Comment: As Nomadicghumakkad said, there are many highly cited academic works which Amit Sood contributed to. Here are some highly cited ones worth mentioning: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11606-011-1640-x https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/201802 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1526820911001145 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0111420 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025619611611154 There are a lot more on Google Scholar, so I think it's safe to say these can satisfy 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC)

Comment: Checked Google Scholar https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Amit+Sood&btnG=. Multiple highly cited academic works exist and hence satisifies the criteria 1 for cademic. There is no GS profile but from the titles of the papers, I think it is the same person. Matches the kind of profile he has. Also,  need not be fulfilled when we are using cademic. (Happens all the time
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A||WP:GNG||WP:A)

Comment: Passes rof#C1
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)