Talk:Rafiq Azam

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


He is the epitome of Green Living in the country.[edit]

Every engineer/architect knows who Rafiq azam is. He is clearly notable. I am taking off the notability tag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.130.27.19 (talk) 10:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia notability guidelines are different from literal notability. Even if every engineer knew about this guy, you'd still need to prove to everyone else why he's important. You'd also need to provide references to back up each contribution to notability. Several Times (talk) 05:24, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

not notable[edit]

this guy is not notable to be here on wikipedia. He might have designed a few buildings here and there but this is not encylopedic. He didnt make any significant contributions that had influence in architectural philosphy. and also did not do any international works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.39.28 (talk) 13:56, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Awards, distinctions, and recognitions[edit]

This article has a long history of people adding exhaustive lists of awards (and other things), and experienced editors removing most of the list entries.

The first pillar of Wikipedia is that it is an encyclopedia. By policy, it should contain encyclopedic content, which is "a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject", not every possible detail on a topic. In deciding whether to include something on a list, consider its importance in proportion to other items on the list and the biography as a whole. "An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject." A good rule of thumb is that if the only sources that cover an award are the awarding organization and the award recipient, then it probably isn't worth mentioning in an encyclopedia.

As is common throughout Wikipedia, experienced editors of this article routinely remove insignificant awards, awards not won (only long listed, short listed, nominated, selected, commended, honorable mentions, etc.), and awards that are not supported by reliable sources. List entries must be verifiable, which is commonly shown by providing an inline citation to a reliable source.

Continuing to add exhaustive and/or unsourced lists, against consensus, is disruptive, as is changing the order of awards. Biographies, lists of works, and awards generally should be ordered chronologically, oldest to newest. Please consider the above and discuss here before adding large numbers of entries to the embedded lists in this article. --Worldbruce (talk) 20:07, 9 February 2017 (UTC)