Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmed Abdel Azeem


 * 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   delete. Spartaz Humbug! 05:49, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Ahmed Abdel Azeem

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:PROF - seems to be a (no offence intended) bog-standard academic. Cameron Scott (talk) 09:00, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Cameron. What is a "bog-standard" academic? Is this directed at Suez Canal University with its 21000 students or is it directed at Azeem. Can you give your reasons for considering either the university or Azeem as "bog standard"? DonaldRichardSands (talk) 19:01, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you are getting confused about an british-english term - "bog-standard" does not mean "sub-standard", it means 'normal' or run of the mill. His work seems in keeping with what you'd expect from a post-doc but that's not enough for WP:PROF. --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * He's the first Egyptian and African to get the EOL fellowship based on his achievement in documenting fungi in Egypt. G.S. Soliman (talk) 10:33, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Then this needs to be noted and reliably sourced in the article!  Nik the  stoned  11:46, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: The fellowship program only started in 2010, so winning it may not be that noteworthy yet. EOL has a WP article; maybe the fellowship program belongs there, with recipient info. --Chonak (talk) 04:30, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:PROF jsfouche &#9789;&#9790; Talk 11:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi .. I would like to know if possible. Why is it, that the link to Encyclopedia of Life is working as an external link in a notable article like "Fungi" but keeps getting rejected and deleted in this article as a "self generated website"!!!G.S. Soliman (talk) 18:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, G. S. Soliman. How does the Encyclopedia of Life function? How does it compare to the editorial function here at Wikipedia. Can individuals make contributions? If so, Wikipedia, if I remember correctly, does not accept such sources as reliable. What is the nature of EOL? DonaldRichardSands (talk) 18:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Keep I am still getting acquainted with the accomplishments of Ahmed Abdel Azeem. His team have done significant studies and made positive recommendations for the improved public health of the citizens of Egypt. My goal at this point is to include in the Wikipedia article the documentation for his contribution to the welfare of his fellow Egyptians. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 18:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


 * His team? according to his own bio - he's a post-doc. --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:36, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Cameron, I don't understand how a post-doc functions. I do know that in two of the research reports I have read authored by Dr. Azeem, he lists others along with himself. To me, that's a team. I understand that the order of those in the list signifies prominence in the research (I could be wrong). In the study of the 70 children even a dentist seems to have been on the team. There is a study dating back to 2005 where Dr. Azeem describes a team consisting of an assitant lecturer and three fourth-year microbiology students. The report comes to the Internet through Operation Wallacea, another interesting facet to this man's academic relationships. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 00:18, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Once you get your PhD, you do a post-doc, it's the bottom rung of an academic career - no shame in that I've done one myself but it's certainly not the stuff of WP:PROF. You seem to be taking a lot of completely run of the mill academic activity and using that as evidence (based on criteria that seems to only exist in your head) that he's special in some way. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:56, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello DonaldRichardSand, THE EOL does not function as Wikipedia and is not a accessible to edit by anyone ..here is how contributors to EOL are chosen " EOL Rubenstein Fellows are selected through an international competition administered by the Species Pages Group of the EOL, with additional support from an application review committee. More than 60 Fellows are expected to be awarded over the four years of the program, which began in 2010." .. i have posted the links again as external links although i think one of them needs to be used as reference but it keeps getting deleted by some editors so i hope it survives this time .G.S. Soliman (talk) 19:05, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:33, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO, and WP:PROF. Furthermore, the article is being heavily edited by an editor with a COI that refuses to stop editing this and other articles even after agreeing to stop.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 21:10, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

but I stopped ! it was trimmed down to almost nothing but then another editor started retrieving reliable-sourced data G.S. Soliman (talk) 21:28, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No, you didn't. You were editing just 2 hours ago.  jsfouche &#9789;&#9790; Talk 21:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I only added a link and it kept getting deleted but now that someone else posted it right it is still there .. OK seems I'm here only to apologizeG.S. Soliman (talk) 21:47, 18 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs) 21:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Minimal impact on Google Scholar, too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:41, 18 July 2011 (UTC).

What is canvassing? DonaldRichardSands (talk) 03:52, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note WP:PROF "is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply." I suggest that Dr. Azeem's article should be considered an exception. His work, though focused on microbiota, has already made a significant contribution on the advancement of science in Egypt. In summary, consider Azeem's involvement in the Encyclopedia of Life, the International Water Technology Conference, Operation Wallacea, and the systematizing of fungi information for Egypt. The public health study of the 70 children in the St. Katherine's protectorate deserves special note. The information re: Dr. Azeem seems like it would be of interest to a significant number of the Wikipedia readership, IMO.DonaldRichardSands (talk) 01:38, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I note that the above editor has been given a special barnstar on his talkpage by Soliman for advocacy of this article. This appears to be canvassing. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:50, 19 July 2011 (UTC).
 * This. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC).


 * Hi Xxanthippe. Perhaps you can explain how the Barnstar is canvassing. I have looked over the description and cannot find anything that fits. The Barnstar came long after I have been involved in the discussion. It is a simple thank you, I figure. I have not been convassed to take part. My involvement began when a random invitation was sent to me by the Wikipedia system. But, now that I am involved, I have met those interested in this article, either to save it or delete. I think this is the first time we have conversed. Welcome to the discussion. :) DonaldRichardSands (talk) 04:13, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I am sure that you are completely without fault in this matter. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC).

Hello

Would anybody consider this awards of him on contribution of community development by Suez Canal University..thanks G.S. Soliman (talk) 10:54, 19 July 2011 (UTC) This research as well G.S. Soliman (talk) 11:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Jsfouche : see i'm not editing now .. just proposing links G.S. Soliman (talk) 11:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. A junior researcher, only a postdoc, clearly fails WP:PROF. Academics at this career stage are almost never notable and this case is no exception. Only a few cites in GScholar, h-index in low single digits, no major awards and nothing else to demonstrate passing WP:PROF. Nsk92 (talk) 12:34, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

More papers on Opwall G.S. Soliman (talk) 15:03, 19 July 2011 (UTC) and Another link: APS Journals and [www.asplantprotection.org/PDF/ANEPPN/NEPPNEL48En.pdf]

another link: On SpringLink On mycorrhiza

I just don't know if I can post them myself in the article? I respect the agreement.G.S. Soliman (talk) 15:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

On Egyptian British Biological Society

G.S. Soliman (talk) 16:23, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * G.S. Soliman, I suggest that you find journal templates and on a page like this put the journal of interest into standard format. This is a rather time consuming task, but a very important one. Once they are in standard format, anyone who recognizes their value can add them to the article where appropriate. You willingness to keep at arm's length from the actual editing of the article is noted and respected. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 03:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

YEs DonaldRichardSands .. I stay away from actual editing ..the significance of this person is not only in his academics but in the proportion of contribution he presented to advance the science in his area of expertise in Egypt and therefore to the world's database of fungi. Thank you for your patience.G.S. Soliman (talk) 04:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

OK I hope this works

Article

and the award of Suez Canal University on his efforts in serving the community based on his academic research as measured to the scarcity of knowledge, research and achievement in his field of expertise in Egypt. G.S. Soliman (talk) 06:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs) 06:46, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment without judging the notability, I think I must object to the wording of the nomination "a bog-standard X" is an insulting phrase,and should not be used of a living person.   DGG ( talk ) 02:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree. It is an unfortunate use of language. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC).
 * I agree that it was an unfortunate use of language, but I'm sure the nominator intended no insult. The phrase means "ordinary, with no special or unusual features," and I'm sure that's all that was intended. It's a common phrase in British English, though clearly it comes across as very negative outside the UK. -- 202.124.73.177 (talk) 03:30, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:PROF. The publications listed above are of high quality, no doubt, but are not more than is expected of an ordinary academic, and are not highly cited. There is no other evidence of notability, at least in English (although of course there may be such evidence in local Egyptian media). -- 202.124.72.14 (talk) 06:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. I also note that the creator of this article, User:Doveye71, appears to be Gihan Sami Soliman, who is a colleague of the subject. -- 202.124.72.14 (talk) 06:13, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment on Comment. I believe that the development of the article has moved beyond Soliman's creation. Ahmed Abdel Azeem has made some significant contributions to the scientific world of Egypt. His accomplishments seem like they would be of interest to our readership here at Wikipedia. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 18:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I think the article and references demonstrate is an an expert--perhaps even the expert--in his special subject, and that meets WP:PROF.    DGG ( talk ) 03:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * What makes you say that? Azeem's own list of notable Egyptian mycologists includes people like Prof. Moubasher at Assiut University and his team, who have many more (and more frequently cited) publications. -- 202.124.73.175 (talk) 10:05, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As I have learned of Azeem, I have also learned of the field of mycology and how many scientists specialize in mycology. I am impressed with Azeem's published work. His historical summary alone should win him recognition. Also, his work with other to assess the water in the St. Katherine's protectorate, where they studied the blood samples 70 youth with recommendations, is a praiseworthy public health study. As I have begun my study of mycologists, I have concluded that Azeem has just begun. He is not yet a major force among scientists who study mycology, but his work is significant and he is beginning to be recognized. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 14:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment if the subject has "just begun," that implies a lack of notability in the Wikipedia sense. Nor do his publications, excellent as they are, qualify for WP:PROF until they begin to be highly cited. -- 202.124.74.78 (talk) 15:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Being an expert in a particular field of study is not sufficient to pass WP:PROF. Most academics holding a faculty appointment somewhere qualify as experts in something. WP:PROF requires evidence that the person "has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.". In fact, even being "the expert" on a particular topic is not sufficient. To quote from WP:PROF: "Arguing that someone is an expert in an extremely narrow area of study is, in and of itself, not necessarily sufficient to satisfy Criterion 1, except for the actual leaders in those subjects." It is rather rare for an academic at the postdoc stage in their career to be considered notable under WP:PROF. I can't remember a case where a WP article about a postdoc survived an AfD. A postdoc may satisfy WP:PROF under some exceptional circumstances, such as winning a major award, or producing work that is extremely highly cited. These kinds of exceptional circumstances are not present here. Nsk92 (talk) 16:00, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.