The Commonwealth Medical College   David is this article notable Wim    A medical school is notable As a part of a university  it almost always gets a separate article if theres information available As a freestanding one  like this it would certainly be notable like all other institutions of higher education  Plans for one that have reached the stage of intending to admit students for Sept  indicate that a great deal of work and funding has already been accomplishedits analogous to film that is well into production That preliminary accreditation has been achieved is also highly significant it does need references of course and some more information    Makes sense thanks     FYI the original editor TCMC has started adding text which is on the spammy side to the article Ive left him a note on his talk page asking him to either fully reference anything he adds or preferably stick to the talk page Feel free to trout me if thats out of order        Offline from Torkel Franzn RfD   Im taking this offline from the Torkel Franzn RfD since we agree on the point thats relevant in that context and I dont want to waste the projects time with meta stuff  Actually my review of Torkel Franzns book would be very negative but Im asking for a keep so I think Im safe from the charge that Im arguing for a keep based on my own review of TFs book  If the math profession had reviewed TFs book that way I would hed be a delete for sure  Though perhaps you were saying that I was making the case for notability based on my strong dislike of TFs book   Actually no though its just that Ive gotten the sense that TF is well respected by others and Im trying to figure out how to document that  FYI Ive been in touch with the author of the best book on Gdels proof for the layperson Rudy Rucker the book is Infinity and the Mind  Rucker has never even heard of TF despite the fact that TFs book criticizes Rucker by name  That would argue for nonnotability but under the Wikipedian rules of evidence its just irrelevant hearsay I gather  Im new to RfD discussions and I will admit my attempts to state the case for TFs notability are awkward  Thanks    Absolutely I understood that Your argument there was perfectly correct and appropriate I couldnt think of a better way to word it to clarify that  But I thought it was a good place to make the point because others had been discussing it on the terms  And of course as you realise perfectly well it doesnt necessarily mattera notable bad scientist can be notable none the less just like a notable bad movie  The actual quality is rarely argued in Wikipedia except on computer and math related topics though once in a while the neuroscience people do similarly Otherwise there arent enough expert types to matter We will argue whether someone is respected however and this is usually done by analyzing the quality of the journals he publishes in or  quality of the publishers of his books My own feeling is the notability in this case is a little borderline but there is some disagreement over whether it just includes people like him or just excludes him Typically it depends a little on subjectsubjects people disrespect get judged more strictly