Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mahdi Hasan

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Mz7 (talk) 23:04, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mahdi Hasan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Spammy tone, largely unsourced, mainly a list of fairly standard research, not sure that he meets the notability criteria for academics Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:35, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Subject is probably notable on the basis of "Hasan was an elected Fellow of the National Academy of Medical Sciences (India) [FAMS], Indian National Science Academy [FNA] & National Academy of Science, India [FNASc]." This would ring the WP:NACADEMICS bell (see #3). Unfortunately the sources as cited are so confusing as to be completely worthless and thus WP:V is a legitimate issue. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:18, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:47, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:47, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep possibly an example of one of Wikipedia's biases. Some examples of notability:--LT910001 (talk) 02:02, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- [1]
- [2]
- [3]
- [4]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:47, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think the Padma Shri award and the sources listed above are clearly enough to demonstrate notability per WP:GNG. WP:PROF#C2 and #C3 are also both likely. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:15, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly a problematic article with some POV editors that are apparently not really familiar with our policies and have not much clue about what constitutes an encyclopedic article. I have wrestled with it myself, at some point even proposing it for speedy deletion as spam. The article is still rather disastrous, but for better or for worse, Hasan appears to be notable and the sources are there to prove it. Article should perhaps be stubbified to get rid of all the fluff. I'd be willing to add it to my watchlist again to help avoid that the POV editors put that stuff back. --Randykitty (talk) 13:28, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep: An article that said "Mahdi Hasan is an Padma Shri recipient" would have been enough for keeping. AfDs are not for cleanup. However if you wish, you may do so now as well. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:49, 18 March 2014 (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.