Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas Alahverdian


 * 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. WP:SNOW. The Bushranger One ping only 23:24, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Nicholas Alahverdian

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:BIO, WP:PERP, and I didn't see any other criteria he'd fall under. Should either be deleted or redirected to Alahverdian v. Rhode Island Department of Children, Youth and Families, et al, but perhaps that article should be deleted as well. The edit history for the article is also a bit sketchy with a lot of WP:SPAs. Odie5533 (talk) 00:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 00:13, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Rhode Island-related deletion discussions.  I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 00:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  I, Jethrobot  drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 00:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete or perhaps redirect to Alahverdian v. Rhode Island Department of Children, Youth and Families, et al, if that article meets the notability guidelines for court cases (I'm not sure what those are currently). I added the notability tag to the article and I'll repeat what I said on the talk page "Subject of article does not seem to meet WP:GNG currently. The article does not violate WP:BLP because everything is sourced, however the source articles do not verify notability. The only thing that comes close is the court case mentioned at the bottom, however, that still fails to meet the guidelines for a bio article (or even article pertaining to the event laid out within WP:CRIME. Also, I have suspicions the article may have been made by the subject, which isn't expressly forbidden on Wikipedia, but doesn't help the argument that the bio was made simply due to the subject's notability." 97.91.179.39 (talk) 00:18, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I am the above IP address user. This AFD has been blanked once by a new account, cutting off discussion. Is an admin seeing this activity? Thanks! NewAccount4Me (talk) 01:10, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom.  GregJackP   Boomer!   01:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as BLP:1E. An spa has been deleting many of this AfD's entries on siscussion pages. Admin attention needed. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:07, 17 August 2013 (UTC).
 * Delete - Originator of a legal case, defendant in a legal case, and blogger. Coverage of the first two is superficial; of the latter seemingly non-existent. Pretty clearly either self-written or pay-for-play. It's a nicely constructed Wikipedia article, but on the strict question of whether this subject passes GNG — or any Special Notability low bar — that answer appears to be no. Carrite (talk) 02:27, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - related AfD is at Articles for deletion/Alahverdian v. Rhode Island Department of Children, Youth and Families, et al. GregJackP   Boomer!   02:45, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:BLP1E with a good solid helping of WP:OR thrown into the mix. There's a whole section where someone has tried to reinterpret primary source court documents to re-argue a legal case, much of which is a blatant WP:BLP violation. Can someone WP:SNOW close this and be done with it? Stalwart 111  03:09, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:BLP1E at best, and even that might be somewhat generous. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  04:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - I deleted a large portion of the page as a WP:BLP violation and outlined my reasons on the talk page (somewhat limited - it's worse than what I explained, I have further information that I am willing to provide to any admin that needs it).  GregJackP   Boomer!   05:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Yea, google for this guy's name and it turns up a slew of blogs and such where his crusade (against a wide variety of things) is carried out, in excruciating detail. There's nothing of actual notability though, and what reliable sources do make mention of this person do so in the context of the lawsuit and even then only briefly.  The lawsuit itself isn't notable either. Tarc (talk) 12:43, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Like others have said, on a good day this might meet WP:BLP1E at best. This isn't a good day. First Light (talk) 21:24, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete As per the clear consensus already established. No notability established.Jeppiz (talk) 21:50, 17 August 2013 (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.