Sandy Szwarc: It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this.  Boleyn ( talk ) 16:23, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Women , Food and drink ,  and United States of America .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:27, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and improve as needed; don't delete.  The article is referenced, provides information, and has been in existence and stable for years.  She is indeed a published author and has been quoted elsewhere.  note: https://www.acsh.org/news/2018/06/08/third-hand-smoke-screen-fear-13060 Bookworm857158367 ( talk ) 17:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] acsh.org is the American Council on Science and Health , which also critiqued some of her writing in 2003 .  Beccaynr ( talk ) 19:35, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - Szwarc is described in Nature Medicine (2010) "State of denial", as part of a list of "a few of today's most vocal denialists spreading ideas that counter the consensus in health fields."  IUBMB Life (2004) "Website Horrors: The Wars of the Carbohydrates : Part 1" discusses writing by Szwarc that was promoted by the Corn Refiners Association , ("How this chemical monstrosity got onto the website of the supplier of US corn starch is perplexing.").  WP:FRINGEBLP may apply.  Beccaynr ( talk ) 18:37, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] A Science-Based Medicine website/blog post by Steven Novella in 2008 describes one of her writings as including "a rather bizarre and incoherent argument" as well as "irrelevant straw men and non sequiturs", and her Junkfood Science blog as "although billed as a “skeptical” blog she has earned a mixed reputation and seems to deny any link between diet, weight, and health".  A 2008 ScienceBlogs post by David Gorski includes, "after reading her blog long enough, it became clear to me that she has a distressing tendency to use unscientific tactics, such as cherry picking data, attacking scientific consensus, and alleging conspiracies", and then discusses the same writing.  Beccaynr ( talk ) 19:10, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] All of which could be included in the article if people noticed her  enough about it to criticize her.  Bookworm857158367 ( talk ) 00:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - my searches are also not finding substantial support for notability, including WP:BASIC and WP:AUTHOR ; in addition, there appear to be WP:FRINGEBLP issues, e.g. whether there are enough sources available to write a neutral biography that neither unduly promotes nor denigrates the subject .  The limited support for notability seems to make a neutral biography even more difficult to write at this time.  Beccaynr ( talk ) 19:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions .  Beccaynr ( talk ) 20:00, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions .  Beccaynr ( talk ) 20:00, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No pass of WP:Prof .  Can sources for GNG be found?  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 21:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Consensus is trending to Delete, but it would be helpful to get another view or two.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete.  Does not meet WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR or GNG.  Qflib ( talk ) 03:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete.  Doing a google scholar search, this person is clearly not an academic researcher in the sense of WP:PROF https://scholar.google.com/scholar? hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Sandy+Szwarc&btnG= ( Eco2022 ( talk ) 14:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC) ) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete