Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Omid Kamvari


 * 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 speedy keep.--114.81.255.40 (talk) 13:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Omid Kamvari

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject of this article has requested deletion via OTRS (ticket #2014091110017035, for those with OTRS permissions). With no independent sources, I'm inclined to agree that the page shoudl be deleted. Yunshui 雲 水 09:51, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:17, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:17, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:17, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - I respect his right to ask for deletion but it would appear he is notable. The sources may not be inline but there would seem to be coverage in fairly well-respected international architecture publications. If he really is responsible for the buildings detailed in the article (some of which are notable in their own right) then I'm inclined to think he'd be considered a notable architect by our standards. But I can't read the ticket - is there a request for clean up or deletion or is it just a straight request for deletion? I'd be happy to work on the article if the subject is simply upset at having a messy biography.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 12:24, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Without getting into the details, it's specifically a request for deletion rather than cleanup. Yunshui 雲 水 12:31, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * On specific grounds (inaccuracy, privacy, self-deprecation)? Without a reason for deletion, there wouldn't seem to be grounds for deleting the article of a notable architect. As has been tested in the past, there's no opt-out clause.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 12:40, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * He's just this minute pointed out that the content appears to be copied from his LinkedIn profile and CV. However, after discussion it seems he's not averse to having a well-written and policy compliant article; I think now that his concern was more the embarassment of having such a poorly written article associated with him. If you would like to clean it up, with suitable sources etc., then please do go for it. Based on his last email, I'm going to Withdraw this nomination. Yunshui 雲 水 13:11, 22 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.