Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akbar Nikkhah


 * 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. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 22:58, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Akbar Nikkhah

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NPROF, their claim to fame is being on the 'editorial board' of several predatory journals and publishers. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:51, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't know what you mean by 'predatory' journals, but the person is a Chief Highly Distinguished Professor, and that, establishes his notability for WP:PROF.--Biografer (talk) 20:58, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * See predatory journal. "Chief Highly Distinguished Professor" (an unsourced claim) is a near meaningless title that is simply your random university puffery. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:05, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, this is by no means my university puffery, but the claim is verified. All three sources claim that he is "Chief Highly Distinguished Professor". I don't know why you call it "unsourced", but the sources are there, all 3 mention it.
 * All 3 sources which are predatory publishers, like OMICS Publishing Group which have a reputation for lying and making things up. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:39, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I did my best. Adding 8 additional sources which are also probably not reliable.:( The purpose for the creation was that he is "Chief Highly Distinguished Professor" and that his h-index is 27, according to Google Scholar. Can't go wrong with GS! :)--Biografer (talk) 23:25, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, most/all of those are predatory. And GS will index these, so an H-index of 27 obtained through self-citations via predatory journals (see all the SCRIP journals for examples) is also worth nothing, so yes you can go wrong with GS. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:26, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

&#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 05:04, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Source analysis – https://beallslist.weebly.com/
 * - ScholArena, predatory publisher
 * – Sciedu Press, predatory publisher
 * – SciTech Central, predatory publisher
 * – Journal of Animal and Poultry Sciences, predatory journal
 * – Juniper Publishers, predatory publisher
 * – MedCrave, predatory publisher
 * – Longdom Publishing, predatory publisher
 * – Sponsored by Engineering Information Institute/Engii, predatory conference (see also )
 * – Ivy Union Publishing, predatory publisher
 * - Athens Institute for Education and Research, predatory publisher
 * Engineering Information Institute, predatory publisher (see also )


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:51, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:55, 24 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment I didn't quickly find anything that looks like a reliable source (say, from the University of Zanjan) for a "Chief Highly Distinguished" title. Perhaps someone who speaks Farsi could do better. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 21:09, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The sad thing is that I don't speak it, and those who do, are in Iran and their Wikipedia is blocked until the protests will quiet down a bit there. :(--Biografer (talk) 22:29, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 21:17, 24 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Little to be found except puffery. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:36, 28 November 2019 (UTC).
 * Delete. The claim that his university gives him a title of distinction has failed verification, editing a predatory journal does not pass WP:PROF, and he doesn't have high enough citations for C1. So what else is there? And if we kept the article we would probably have to explain issues like the predatory nature of the journals (or maybe also this withdrawn paper depending on why it was withdrawn, if that information is available), not what the subject is likely to want. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:41, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It could be argued that the withdrawn paper (well spotted) increases his notability. After all, that is a rare distinction, which should be included in the BIO, if kept. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:16, 29 November 2019 (UTC).
 * There are two of those btw, and . &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 06:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete No reliable source for the "highly distinguished" title(s) has emerged, and the large number of editorships for predatory journals is a warning sign.  Russ Woodroofe (talk) 06:59, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of sources. Google Scholar is often hard to use properly, but from https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/Akbar-Nikkhah/65981167 (sorted by "highly influential citations") it's easy to see a pattern of self-citation. Nemo 14:30, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Wasn't even aware of self-citations. I thought that academics rely on others to cite their work?--Biografer (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Self-citation isn't necessarily nefarious, but in publish or perish cultures (most of the world currently) scholars often pursue metrics above everything else and fake citation networks are a common tactic, see for instance 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000384 and https://publicationethics.org/files/COPE_DD_A4_Citation_Manipulation_Jul19_SCREEN_AW2.pdf for more information. Nemo 16:00, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - He does not have the necessary notability. and no reliable source for the "highly distinguished" title has emerged. - MA Javadi (talk) 21:56, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete clearly non-notable! Brayan ocaner (talk) 10:18, 1 December 2019 (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.