Deletion of Richard D. King (psychiatrist)

Comment: and ''salt with extreme prejudice'' per , , , , and . If this were 2008, we |could excuse and laugh off an academic of no repute posting their own page on Wikipedia to push their pet theories, but it's 2020, and everybody knows that's not the purpose of Wikipedia, a charity. There are two sources, neither of which is reliable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:SOAP||WP:FRINGE||WP:SPAM||WP:RS||WP:AGF)

Comment: or possibly '''redirect''' to melanin theory, although the article's current title would make that rather awkward). He existed, and he was a pseudoscientist, but he wasn't notable. I found https://books.google.ca/books?id=6_ldDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA227 one source describing his ''African Origins of Biological Psychiatry'' as an "important work from the so-called melanin scholars"—but it's a passing mention in a footnote. Melanin theory is clearly notable; King was not. Thanks to {{ping|El cid, el campeador|p=}} for a thoughtful nom in which they clearly |did their research
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)