Deletion of Jin Wang Kim

Comment: The World Cat search string Joungok provided above (at 12:28 18 February, 2011 UTC) didn't enclose the subject's name in quotation marks. http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=%22Jin+Wang+Kim%22&qt=results_page This one does, and it returns three papers only, from 1997 and 1998, two of which list "Joung Ok Lee" as second author. Our Wikipedia  | single-purpose account friend, "Joungok" is obviously the same person, presumably promoting his professor's or mentor's career. I'm sure Jin Wang Kim is a fine doctor, and I'm sure Joungok means well, despite having twice removed the AfD tag from this article, but he obviously doesn't understand , , and a host of other relevant policies. In short, and without the least offence intended, this article is academic |fancruft, and clearly can't be permitted to remain. Sorry, Joungok. &nbsp;–&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA||WP:COI||WP:ACADEMIC||WP:FANCRUFT)

Comment: Joungok, it would be better for you to add these references to the article in a neat, orderly way than to just keep throwing them at our heads here. I still don't think Jin Wang Kim meets our standards for an article, but if there is anything in all the references you're giving us here, on this AfD page, that would change anyone's mind, we will never find it. There is just too much here, and it is presented in too disorganized a way. To speak directly, no one here is going to take the time to sort through all of the poorly formatted links you're giving us here. You need to present them in an orderly way that makes it easy for your fellow editors to verify them. That's what ''articles'' are for. This process should continue another four or five days; that will give you time to try to add meaningful, |reliable references to the article, to try to make your case that Dr. Kim is |notable. Again, I think that will probably be wasted effort; I doubt he is notable, as we all use that word here. But arguing with each new vote here, with new links for every one, is not going to work. Put them in the article if they're useful, and then come back here and ask us to take another look. &nbsp;–&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RELY||WP:NOTE)

Comment: I think we can all predict where this is going, but let's give Joungok the time to sort all these links properly and integrate them into the article, to whatever extent they legitimately can be. It seems remotely possible to me that we could all be surprised. So '''no  closure, okay?''' at least not until we see whether the article improves? Either that, or a wp:snow userfy might be tolerable, to give the creator time to sort all these links into the article. Just my three cents. :) &nbsp;–&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)