Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Bong-han
WP:FRINGE subjects need mainstream sources per . We don't have these here; instead we have a Hindawi (read: inadequately peer-reviewed) journal, an acupuncture journal, and a credulous puff piece in a business magazine. In addition, the article seems to be a  pseudo-biography with half its text and all of its supposed notability based on this one discovery. And the "Legacy" quote is purely promotional retrofitting, almost as embarrassing as the attempts to vindicate Immanuel Velikovsky|Velikovsky by the discovery of 90377 Sedna|Sedna. If the parts of the article on his dscoveries were to be completely rewritten based on mainstream sources as DGG suggests, it might be salveagable — I don't think the parts of the article regarding Kim's life are in dispute — but I don't know where these mainstream sources are to be found if they even exist. I did some searches looking for them and came up empty
— User:David, 00:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:EXCEPTIONAL||WP:COATRACK (Wikipedia:Verifiability)