Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naeem Gheriany

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. The consensus below is that he is notable for his political appointment. Eluchil404 (talk) 09:14, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Naeem Gheriany (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

I am completing this nomination on behalf of 204.152.214.234 (talk), who correctly followed the instructions for IP users at WP:AFD by completing Step 1 and noting reasons for deletion on the article talk page. The reasons given are:

According to Wikipedia for scholars "notability criteria" are:

• A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
• Or, The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times.
• Or, the person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.

This entry does not meet the guidelines and it should be removed.

I do not think that acting as clerk to complete the nomination disqualifies me from giving my opinion, which I shall do below. JohnCD (talk) 12:38, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. JohnCD (talk) 12:40, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep Keep - the nomination refers only to WP:PROF, but whether or not he meets that, per WP:POLITICIAN #1 a government minister is undoubtedly notable. JohnCD (talk) 12:43, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On going back to check WP:SK I realise it does not apply here. JohnCD (talk) 14:45, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Seems wp:notable. North8000 (talk) 13:21, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per JohnCD; the subject does appear to meet POLITICIAN, regardless of PROF. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:40, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Government minister, meets WP:POLITICIAN. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 17:26, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep As per JohnCD and meets WP:POLITICIAN.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:18, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per others, meets WP:POLITICIAN. Jeancey (talk) 17:30, 9 February 2012 (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.