Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamid Rajaei


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 17:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Hamid Rajaei

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication of notability, no significant coverage in reliable independent sources. Invented the recently-deleted galaxy-like and gradual correspondence theory, which now turns this article into a WP:COATRACK. Huon (talk) 22:12, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. (t)  Josve05a  (c) 23:44, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. (t)  Josve05a  (c) 23:44, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. (t)  Josve05a  (c) 23:44, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. (t)  Josve05a  (c) 23:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. The article fails Notability (academics). Virtually all sources are either self-published or unreliable. It also violates WP:SYNTH and WP:RS. See also this thread. --Omnipaedista (talk) 03:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, and per Omnipaedista. No real evidence of meeting Wikipedia notability criteria, and the material on the 'theory' is almost devoid of intelligible content. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:10, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Lacks the independent coverage required by GNG. 131.118.229.17 (talk) 01:30, 10 September 2014 (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.