Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ali Said Faqi


 * 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   no consensus. Fritzpoll (talk) 13:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Ali Said Faqi

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Does not satisfy the conditions for notability with regards to scientists, WP:PROF. Sixty peer-reviewed publications is quite common, and in itself not enough for notability. No other merits are mentioned which could justify inclusion. --  Crowsnest (talk) 11:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 60 papers is nothing to sneeze at, but I agree that it's below the bar of notability. He seems to be have been entered as an example of a Somali scientist; probably there are not many of them in the west. But that doesn't merit a whole entry; at most it would qualify him for an entry on a list. See: Category:Somali scientists; they're all up for deletion. Hairhorn (talk) 12:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Keep - Before i make my case for Ali Said Faqi i would like to note that I have looked around at the scientist pages of other ethnic groups and 60 peer reviewed papers is not common at all, if we at wikipedia.org are setting a bar/treshold at what can be considered notable then let's make sure these same bars/tresholds don't shift along ethnic lines, how are the following scientists more notable than Ali Said Faqi?: I'm sure i could find more if i did a thorough search but i believe that's not neccessary because i think my point is clear(unless there is a special criteria for Somali researchers only that i'm not aware of?). Here is why i believe he should have his own entry and this is not exclusively related to Science:
 * E._Licaj
 * Laura_Mersini
 * Marcela_Contreras
 * Ali_Akdemir
 * Gjorgi Hadži-Angelkovski
 * Besides his contributions in scientific journals which have been cited in several books, he also Co-authored: Zonal recovering in equatorial sandhoppers: interaction between magnetic and solar orientation
 * He is a prominent member of the Somali Studies organization and has been chairman several times.
 * During his stay at Allergan Pharmaceuticals he was a senior scientist dealing with global entities:

MPI RESEARCH hires Dr. Ali Said Faqi, a well-known and eminent scientist.

MPI Research is pleased to announce the addition of Ali Said Faqi, DVM, Ph.D., D.A.B.T to our scientific staff as Director of Developmental and Reproductive Toxicology. Dr. Faqi recently came to MPI Research from Allergan, Inc., where he was responsible for monitoring internal and outsourced toxicology studies, and for the preparation of regulatory documents for submission to worldwide agencies in compliance with ICH, FDA, CPMP and other guidelines.

For this reason i believe the deletion of his entry is not justified --Scoobycentric (talk) 15:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Is a Adjunct Professor of Biological Sciences at Mpi Research Inc
 * Is a independent scholar on non-scientific issues and has written dozens of papers on Somali issues which are circulating in Somali scholarship, the most prominant example being: An Urgent Need for Environmental Protection Policy in Somalia(Ali S Faqi 2007)
 * It's not considered a good defense to point to unrelated articles to argue against deletion. Since anyone can create an article, existing articles do not necessarily meet criteria for inclusion either (See Other stuff exists). As for the examples, Marcela Contreras holds a senior government position, was given an award by Queen Elizabeth, etc, she's hardly comparable. Some of the other articles you cite may in fact be reasonable candidates for deletion. Hairhorn (talk) 15:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree, but it was less about pointing fingers and more about how emulation is common on wikipedia because when a wiki-editor makes a new template or an article, the person observes and studies existing templates and articles and tries to emulate them, as i have done with these entries about Somali researchers. Fair enough regarding Marcela Contreras --Scoobycentric (talk) 15:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Per Scoobycentric's detailed justification above, the article seems worth keeping. Faqi is clearly notable. Middayexpress (talk) 19:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Which conditions of WP:PROF does he satisfy, and if so: can you provide reliable sources for that? -- Crowsnest (talk) 22:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

H-INDEX (Hirsch Number): 11. Egghe's G-INDEX: 19 Maximum Cites: 82 Total Cites: 438, Total Articles: 52 Cites/Paper: 8.4230 -
 * comment His notability is twofold, first as a researcher and second as a independent scholar, this i have demonstrated in that very elaborate post further up the page. I also found out that citability through systems such as H-index and G-index could be used in arguments against deletion - Ali Said Faqi's H-Index level at QuadSearch:
 * This level is higher than many other scientists currently featuring on wikipedia(but i won't mention them per Hairhorn's advice about pointing to other articles in discussions) --Scoobycentric (talk) 17:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —David Eppstein (talk) 04:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Funny, I have about the same indexes, but I am far from considering myself notable. -- Crowsnest (talk) 14:39, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  —Crowsnest (talk) 15:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * that's a risky argument. Someone might well try to write an article--it's happened before. People are not very good judges of their own notability.DGG (talk) 00:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Searching Quadsearch in categories of Medicine, Biology, Chemistry I get 43 papers with 368 cites and h = 9. Respectable but far from notable. In view of discussion above-delete. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC).
 * Ali Faqi is not just a scientist but also an expert commentator on Somali politics. He regularly partakes in reconciliation and development conferences alongside other notables such as James C. Swan, theDeputy Assistance Secretary of the African Affairs from the US State Department Bureau of African Affairs. Mr. Francois L. Fall, the UN Special Representative for Somalia and the head of UNPOS, and David Shinn, the former US ambassador to Ethiopia. That only adds to his notability; it doesn't detract from it. Middayexpress (talk) 20:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Where are the reliable secondary sources proving that he is notable in this respect? I cannot find them. Notability cannot be inherited from relationships to other notable people. -- Crowsnest (talk) 22:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * He is noted as an independent scholar. He has contributed on the subject of Somali politics and Society[www.somalistudies.com/etc/SSIA_Edited_Program_6_8_07.pdf](page 8) --Scoobycentric (talk) 23:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That shows he was one of the contributing participants of the conference. It does not show his notability as an expert commentator on Somali politics. -- Crowsnest (talk) 08:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That link I cited in my earlier comment clearly describes him as "an expert commentato[r] on Somali politics". Middayexpress (talk) 11:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep What h index notoriously does not do is indicate the distribution. 8 papers with 8 citations each is an h-index of 8; 1 paper of 8000 and 7 of 8, is also an index of 8. Looking at the actual counts here from Scopus, the most cited papers are 83, 42,38,36,34, 33, 21, 18, 16, 15, 14,  and the actual h-index is 13, not 8. There can be name problems with non0Euriopean names .DGG (talk) 00:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Good point here. Scopus or WoS will be more accurate than GS in this field. Non-European name will be no problem as he identifies himself as A S Faqui which will cause no difficulty. Nonetheless, notability WP:Prof is not obtained and Keep will have to be other grounds. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:24, 6 June 2009 (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.