Talk:Aliza Ayaz

COI vs UPE
This article has a UPE tag but there is no evidence for it. Clearly a COI case though. There may be an employee of a school, and create an "official" account, but that doesn't mean they are being paid for this, either directly or indirectly. The account is effectively disclosed by using the name of the school as the userid, they are newbies and shouldn't be punished with a "$" banner for lack of adding a single sentence to their user page (all that is required for a paid editor). And since they have not added that sentence, and without evidence they actually are paid to edit the article, the banner is not appropriate in this case. -- Green  C  14:25, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Possible reliable sources (for future reference)
Here are some possibly reliable sources, should the current Articles for Deletion (AfD) case lead to the article being sent back to draft form:

Current refs World Urban Forum (ref 1, perhaps, minor); ARY News.tv (ref 2); BrandSynario (ref 3, perhaps: depends on how material is sourced); Geo News (ref 5) look reliable to me. Bloomsbury Festival (ref 20) looks reliable for uncontroversial material; ditto Events at Cambridge Students' Union (ref 22); and especially The News International (ref 31).  Esowteric + Talk  14:54, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Then rewrite the article based on those remaining sources.  Esowteric + Talk  15:01, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I see no reason why sources such as UCL, though not independent, cannot be used to support the awards she's won, but perhaps these could be added later.  Esowteric + Talk  17:43, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Close paraphrase of Career section
The Career section is a close paraphrase or direct copy in parts, and it needs looking at. Short quotations can be used directly, in "quotes", with a reference after each quotation. Click on the report in the section-top banner and you'll see what needs changing.  Esowteric + Talk  13:15, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Merge sections?
I feel both ‘Other work and media image’ and the ‘Talks and keynote addresses’ would be better if integrated into the career section. Gleeanon409 (talk) 15:23, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe leave that just for now, until we see if the article makes it through the ongoing AfD and/or if it's sent back to draft form. Would be interested to hear what Studentsunion thinks, too, as they have a better grasp of the article's subject (?)  Esowteric + Talk  15:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, seen your change, thanks.  Esowteric + Talk  15:38, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Important note to the AfC and NPP editors
The creator of this page could have simply retrieved their abandoned draft from here,. Instead, they started again from the scratch, so the edits made by sock puppets previously are hidden. Also, their first edit was 30th July 2019, and their previous version of Draft on the subject with almost same references back from 2019 didn't meet the notability. The subject clearly fails WP:NACADEMIC as of 14th September, 2020.

Most of the awards won are not notable(on a national or international level), also a lot of references are spam, like for "Ethical Affairs Activist 2019" the reference takes you to the video on Facebook?, also the award won at UN it states "Best Climate Action Proposal" but in the reference, there is no mention of this. Also, there are many such references which are there just to give a feeling like this subject meets notability like reference number 14. . Of course, the current main current/heavy editor isn't looking at all of this, because he wants the article to remain in mainspace, because "I" nominated this page for AfD. (he will probably edit them now that I pointed). When reviewing this page for AfC, please make sure that the subject meets the notability, not because it was endorsed by editor who have been here editing for 10+ years. I am sure he will try to influence his Wikipedia account age as he clearly stated in AfD, he stated that to avoid COI, he will instead submit the draft for review, so it can be passed. His sole intention is to make this article not undergo Draft or get deleted, because "I" nominated this page for deletion for not meeting the notability. He clearly shows interest in my edits as he followed me on the SPI investigation for the same, while supporting the creator of this page Az.jooma and all their sock puppets. Also, please note weren't interested in editing this article which remained unedited last year and also this year when it was recreated, but has only and only shown interest after "I" nominated this for deletion. On a closing note, I want to say that only accept this article only and only if it meets notability criteria, not because some editor(who has been here for 10 years) has personally endorsed. I will keep this article on my watchlist. If I feel that this article has been passed not by notability but because of the influence/endorsed by an old Wikipedian user, then I will take this to AN/I. Thank you! AngusMEOW ( chatter  •  paw trail ) 17:45, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I realize that the article is far from perfect (like us, wiki is always "a work in progress"), but the subject is notable, imo. "Dogs may bark, but the caravan moves on." ~ Sufi saying.  Esowteric + Talk  17:50, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The subject is not notable yet, as per WP:NACADEMIC. Reply to your quote, "not when the dog is barking to the caravan about their leaking water bottles, the caravan wouldn't survive in the desert without water, should have listened what the dog is trying to say"  AngusMEOW  ( chatter  •  paw trail ) 17:58, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
 * They are not even claiming to be an academic! And as for influence, I'm not trying to influence the AfD more than anyone else, merely to display some common sense regarding notability.  Esowteric + Talk  18:09, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

General note on sources
Text should be written based on the actual content of available sources, rather than finding sources later in an attempt to back-up what editors want to write.  Esowteric + Talk  09:21, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Manic cleanup tagging reverted
Have reverted the manic cleanup tagging of this accepted AfC by AngusWOOF, the nominator of a previous deletion request (result was draftify). See WP:Articles for deletion/Aliza Ayaz. Clear conflict-of-interest or other issues here.  Esowteric +  Talk  +  Breadcrumbs   15:46, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps this needs looking at by uninvolved editors or by a previously-involved administrator?  Esowteric +  Talk  +  Breadcrumbs   16:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I've reduced the tagging and put in reasons for why these are still problems. Note that I'm not questioning her notability at this point. I'll let another AFC/NPP reviewer or other editors/admins figure out whether she needs to go back to an AFD cycle. Also note I'm not Angus 1986 / AngusMEOW, the originator of the previous AFD, who has since changed their username to something that doesn't impersonate mine. AngusW🐶🐶F  ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Please see WP:RSSM for why I tagged primary sources regarding the extensive use of student media coming from University College London. This should be trimmed down to a minimum and not be half of the references in the article.  AngusW🐶🐶F  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm concerned with the users Jefknowles Samy17Hudson Liasi37 S.jiv
 * Yes, I changed my username so it doesn't impersonate AngusWOOF(and AngusWOOF is doing a great job, a lot of cleaning to be done). The whole article is full of paid editing and COI, a lot of deceiving, says covered by BBC(but no article linked to it, lot of red flags), but I am not going to get involved in this, not worth my time, I'll let some other experienced editors look into this. QuantumRealm (meow • pawtrack) 08:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Would the sockpuppet reporter please refrain from again making as-yet-unsubstantiated accusations on the article's talk page, as they did at an old AfD? The article was re-worked after draftifying and passed AfC: "The whole article is full of paid editing and COI, a lot of deceiving ..." Thanks,  Esowteric +  Talk  +  Breadcrumbs   09:12, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * "Dogs may bark, but the caravan moves on." ~ Sufi saying. QuantumRealm (meow • pawtrack) 09:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I suggest you take the matter of "The whole article is full of paid editing and COI, a lot of deceiving ..." and its history at AfD to the admin noticeboard.  Esowteric +  Talk  +  Breadcrumbs   09:31, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * "Dogs may bark, but the caravan moves on." ~ Sufi saying. QuantumRealm (meow • pawtrack) 09:46, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Regarding the BBC, there actually was a bare URL pointing to this web page. If you click on "Show more" the programme summary reads: "And Pria is joined by 21-year-old Aliza Ayaz, who has been appointed 'United Nations Youth Envoy for Sustainable Development'." I've used a full citation pointing to the original audio podcast interview, however since that URL is now dead, I've added an archive URL to the web page linked above, and marked the original URL as dead. So that sorts out that alleged conspiracy.  Esowteric +  Talk  +  Breadcrumbs   10:28, 12 May 2021 (UTC)