Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asma Rahim


 * 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.  Sandstein  11:34, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Asma Rahim

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not pass WP:PROF not notable doctor Chantrises (talk) 08:22, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  M assiveYR   ♠  10:54, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  M assiveYR   ♠  10:54, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  M assiveYR   ♠  10:54, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The most likely route to a pass of WP:PROF appears to be criterion 4. Can anyone find evidence that her textbook is widely used in Indian universities? 86.17.222.157 (talk) 11:16, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Wrong her book is not popular and not used in any  University checked it she fails PROF 4 her book was only published this year 2017 Principles and Practices of Community Medicine.It was earlier published in 2008 but failed .She has written only 1 book.Chantrises (talk) 08:13, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 02:20, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can't find any evidence that her textbook has been widely used, cited or reviewed. No other indications that the subject passes WP:PROF or the WP:GNG. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 11:31, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 11:31, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:17, 12 November 2017 (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.