Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mo Afzal


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:16, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Mo Afzal

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Nothing in the article, nor any further information accessible in references or elsewhere, appear to provide adequate demonstrations of notability, as defined in WP:N - specifically neither in WP:ACADEMIC, nor elsewhere in WP:BIO. As far as I can tell the possible reasons for notability are: that Mo Afzal is a particularly inspiring science teacher to sixth form students - organising events such as Showcase Science; that he is Chief Executive of The Afghan Education Trust; and his winning of the Medicine in Society Impact award from the Wellcome Trust. My reasons for suspecting that none of these may be of due notability are that neither Showcase Science nor the Afghan Education Trust appear to be particularly notable, and it is difficult to make a judgement on the Medicine in Society Impact award as the reference attached to it is no longer there. Perhaps someone can advise as to the significance of this award? Gandaliter (talk) 21:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Sixth form students would dispute that he was "particularly inspiring", and Showcase Science has ceased to exist.G N Frykman (talk) 07:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:23, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, unless an actual policy-based reason for deletion is given. People don't stop being notable. Just because press coverage about him has ceased, doesn't make all the existing press coverage vanish. He easily passes the WP:GNG. In the history of this article I've seen edits by people who clearly didn't like the subject of the article: is dislike of the subject - such as that snide comment from GN Frykman - the real reason for this deletion nomination from a little-used account? Fences  &amp;  Windows  19:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG notes that it provides reason for "presumed" notability, but that notability depends on the specific content of the article. As it is, although Afzal has been mentioned in several secondary sources, and the topic of a few, none of them seem to be about anything which is itself notable. For example the Science for the 21st Century Initiative is the main topic of some of the sources, but it has not been considered notable enough by anyone to create a page for it on Wikipedia - perhaps it is notable enough (although I would not say so), and a page should be created for it. Surely if the press coverage is not sufficient to give notability to the topics which it directly addresses, it is also not sufficient to provide notability for someone whose supposed current notability relies on that topic. As I mentioned before there seem to be three of these associations which might provide notability: his being an inspiring science teacher (which has been contested); the Afghan Education Trust (which again does not seem to be notable in itself, so how could it convey notability to its chief executive?), and the award from the Wellcome Trust (for which there are no secondary sources, which would seem to imply that the particular award given is not notable). Of course dislike is not a reason for deletion, but perhaps we can assume from the quantity of vandalism this page has suffered that there are many who would disagree with the opinions expressed in the sources, and reproduced here (such as that Afzal is an inspiring teacher). Also the lack of any sources from scientific journals would perhaps imply that Afzal is not a notable academic. Gandaliter (talk) 13:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Total of 3 cites on GS. There really does not seem to be much else of note. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete not notable under WP{:PROF, and I don't see notability in any other aspect either.   DGG ( talk ) 05:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. The only things the article presents as noteworthy about him are a minor service award and a science fair competition of unspecified locality. That's not enough for WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2011 (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.