Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saeid Eslamian

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. Tone 12:08, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Saeid Eslamian

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The article no reliable references, only links to irrelevant websites. The person does not meet notability criteria at all and is using Wikipedia for promotion. The name of the person is only mentioned in one of the references, which is his university homepage (you could write anything your homepage, so it's not a reliable reference). For biographies of living persons multiple secondary reliable sources are needed. Much of this article is original research. I came across this article after receiving an email from a predatory publication. They included a link to this article as an advertisement. This is clearly for promotion purposes. There are tens of thousands of academics with similar qualifications than this person, but I am afraid none of them meet the notability requirements. I even checked the person's papers before nominating the article for deletion: mostly mediocre or predatory publications. Thanks, Pirehelo (talk) 07:36, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The discussion page was malformed (missing the header and links) and did not show up on the daily log properly. It has been fixed but will need seven days of discussion from today.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malcolmxl5 (talk) 14:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

keep since the person is clearly notable, see https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=CUW8Y6IAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao which shows over 240 papers with more than 10 citations. However, it should be rewritten to be more balanced. --hroest 18:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep. The page has a decent number of views per day when compared to other researchers (see here). I'd like to point out that his citation impact used to be low, with a sudden rapid increase in 2017; maybe a little time should have been given before creating this article. Lastly, since Dr. Eslamian is the creator of the article, and has many contributions on it, there might be a WP:CONFLICT of interest here. Still, I believe it is a net keep. Walwal20 ^{talk ▾ contribs} 04:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, per the citation record and WP:PROF#C1. He appears to be editor in chief of some journals but I'm not convinced they're mainstream and established enough for #C8. But his Google Scholar profile lists him as distinguished professor, and if that could be established by more reliable sources then he would also pass #C5. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:40, 20 August 2020 (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.