Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meisam Tabatabaei (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 02:05, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Meisam Tabatabaei
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NBIO and WP:NACADEMICS: The government award he received was only awarded twice (2010 and 2015) and is not a well-known and significant award or honor by any means (WP:ANYBIO). The person is an editor-in-chief of Biofuel Research Journal but this certainly is not any major, well-established academic journal as required by NACADEMICS - see deletion discussion. No other claims to notability or significance are there in the article.

Additionally, worth noting that the article has already been deleted once as a result of AfD, with a few "keep" !votes added then by a number of single-purpose accounts. The current creator, User:Meisam tab, was recently investigated for COI where he claimed not to be Meisam Tabatabaei, and requested user rename. All this gives an impression of attempts to game the system. — kashmiri  TALK  09:18, 18 June 2016 (UTC) —  kashmiri  TALK  09:18, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:53, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:53, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:54, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:55, 18 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment. The earlier AfD was nearly 7 years ago, and the deleted article didn't include the claims in the present one of being editor in chief of a journal and president of a society, which (if either is significant, something I haven't ascertained) could be enough to pass WP:PROF. So I think we should hold a full AfD rather than going for a G4 speedy deletion. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:24, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete (provisional). A GS h-index of 20 is borderline for a well-cited field. I am suspicious about the GS citation pattern, which looks like a walled-garden of group self-citations. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:08, 20 June 2016 (UTC).
 * Delete non-notable academic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:14, 20 June 2016 (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.