Talk:Kianush Sanjari

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2019 and 12 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): BlackwatchRHR.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

The speedy delete tag on Kianush Sanjari
(moved from User talk:Pedro) The article which you added this tag on, meets the critria in my opinion:

"A person is notable if he or she has been the subject of secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject."

You added the tag almost seconds from it being created, and it already had one secondary reference. Is that even acceptable? --Rayis 13:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, I added the tag seconds after creation. I agree with the above, but that is only part of the notability policy. There must be dozens of people arrested and released everyday (across the world) - why is this more notable than all the others? On a positive note I see the article is well researched and very well cited from strong sources, but I am still not clear on the notability. Pedro | Talk  13:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Then, I suggest you remove the speedy delete tag and nominate it normally --Rayis 13:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Agreed and done. Pedro | Talk  13:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Heh I had never seen this kind of proposition. I guess I might remove it myself. It's not just anybody, it's alleged that this is a well known blogger, notable enough for his arrest to be highlighted in popular media, who may have experienced white torture (very few reported cases) --Rayis 14:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * In any case, it meets the criteria for notability for biographies. Let's remember that this is an encyclopedia where Emmalinas can claim to fame --Rayis 14:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * In fairness you can't argue that "because such and such is in wikipedia then so an so must be". I've seen that before. Nevertheless, I see merit in the facts here. I'm not convinced that this isn't very, very close to a random collection of information but your argument is presuasive and I can't get overcome the quality of the citations provided. I have removed the tag. It's up to someone else to re-apply if they want. Pedro | Talk  14:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, you removed the tag already. I would have prefered you had left them for another editor to remove, in accordance with process as you created the article, but there we go. Pedro | Talk  14:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)