Talk:Sarfaraz K. Niazi

OTRS note
OTRS confirmation of all photos at source: http://www.niazi.com/Photography.html &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:56, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

His books
I'm happy to see that a bloated hagiography is being turned into a decent article (though one that's still dreadfully underreferenced). However, I think the process has been overenthusiastic. In this edit, Smartse pulls out his list of books, with the summary Writings: no secondary sources and an indiscriminate list - WP:NOTRESUME. The (adulatory) commentary on the books was indeed devoid of secondary sources and was quite improper. It's good that this was zapped. But the books themselves need no references. Each has an ISBN: you click on that and thereafter click on the link to Worldcat or wherever to confirm that yes the book exists and is by Niazi, and perhaps to read more about it. I don't interpret WP:IINFO as forbidding lists of published books, I frequently (eg right now) work on such lists myself, and I do not receive complaints about them. For these reasons I propose to restore the list of published books (of course shorn of commentary). Comments? -- Hoary (talk) 23:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC) A bit struck through 23:58, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * there is a list of books in the article now. Jytdog (talk) 23:27, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * and what additional sources about him, are you aware of? i looked quite a bit and used what i could find. (maybe its being "dreadfully underreferenced" is more about him, perhaps?) Jytdog (talk) 23:29, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * The deleted list of books had a lot more items than the current list has. (I'm not sure that all these books are of great merit, but this isn't really for me to judge.) And I'm sorry, I hadn't looked at the article very recently: now it is indeed well referenced. -- Hoary (talk) 23:58, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I would also like to see the list of books reinstated as it seemed a highly appropriate list of works by this individual. I was in the process of cleaning up that list, albeit slowly and overly timidly (as befitted my level of confidence with some of Wikipedia's policies) in comparison with all the great culling work that has been done in recent days. -Lopifalko (talk)
 * The list was copied straight from his website so was a copvio. I evidently have a different opinion on this since unless an author is well-known, it typically requires OR to determine which books are important. From the sources I've looked at, this guy isn't well known for his text books, regardless of what his university biography states. Obviously Orwell's article will list 1984, but biographies shouldn't auomatically include every book that someone has written. SmartSE (talk) 10:52, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'd noticed that the list came straight from the (auto?)hagiographic website. But strip the comments from each book, and you're left with neutral material presented in a standard way: "Title. Place: Publisher, Year. ISBN." (Actually the ISBN in both of two formats: one can be deleted.) I think it's a bit jobsworthy to say either that
 * Textbook of Biopharmaceutics and Clinical Pharmacokinetics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1979. ISBN ISBN 0-8385-8868-9.
 * (which I notice has already been reordered, probably by Lopifalko) is a copyvio of
 * Textbook of Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics, J Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 1979; ISBN-13: 9789381075043. ISBN 0-8385-8868-9
 * or that the WP set is a copyvio of the author's set. And it still seems to me that if a person merits an article then that person's books can be assumed to merit listing within that article, if anyone can be bothered to list them. (Nobody has yet volunteered to list the books of Nobuyoshi Araki, and I am not going to do so; but I'd be happy if somebody did. Wikipedia could have a bibliography of Corín Tellado too.) &para; I do wonder, though, if our biographee would turn out to be the sole or even the primary author of all these books; this would need checking. -- Hoary (talk) 14:56, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

COI
This article has been the subject of a great deal of editing under a conflict of interest. Future editors related to the subject, please read WP:COI and use the "edit request" function - you do that easily by clicking where it says "click here" at the bottom of the yellow/brown box at the top of this page. Jytdog (talk) 00:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC)