Deletion of John Hartnett (physicist)

Comment: notable individual as per . The fact that some of his views run contrary to accepted science means should be noted in the article, not used as a reason to delete the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: the person doesn't satisfy  . As for significant coverage in other reliable sources, there is not significant coverage for an independent article. Their h-index is far less than average for a professor notable in their field
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: as per  above. Subject as an individual at best dubiously meets applicable notability guidelines
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP)

Comment: The citations for his work in physics, while not bad, don't really rise to the level of passing #C1 for me, there is no evidence of passing any of the other  criteria, and I don't think he passes  for his creationism
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG)

Comment: The subject has recieved |significant coverage in |reliable third party sources (for examplehttp://www.sciencealert.com.au/features/20080812-18554.html) and meets the |general notability guidelines
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:IRS||WP:GNG)

Comment: WP:SOAP|Promotional article written with the intent to to burnish the credentialism|credentials of creationists. The article creator is attempting to push a biography to continue his ongoing fundamentalist Christian crusade against science. The person is clearly not notable failing  rather dramatically and being consigned to the general dregs of the |fringe creation science community that lives off the teat of Answers in Genesis. We don't need to have a Wikipedia article about every creationist &mdash only the ones who receive #Independent sources|serious independent third-party notice which this guy does not have. Special:Contributions/69.86.225.27|69.86.225.27
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:FRINGE||WP:FRINGE)

Comment: I appreciate that this may be a borderline case. Google Scholar seems to produce a lot of hits for him, perhaps more than his CV suggests. A search for "http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22JG+Hartnett%22&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=&as_vis=0 JG Hartnett" gives an H-index of 15, but it misses the top result for "http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22John+Hartnett%22&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=&as_vis=0 John Hartnett", which has over 100 citations. So I'm happy with passing him under , though I think we do have  to fall back on
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG)