Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Omid Mehrpour


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. I see a consensus to delete this article, especially given some of the uncertainty brought up by David Eppstein. Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Omid Mehrpour

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Lacks significant coverage in third-party reliable sources. The current sources do not provide the required coverage about the subject, as they are either passing mentions, profiles, or not reliable. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 10:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Iran. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 10:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep: This subject deserves a Wikipedia Page as per WP:Academics. It fulfills The criteria for academic personals.
 * As per the criteria, a subject is considered notable if it fulfills one of the listed criteria. In this case the subject fulfills 1 or more of the WP:Academics criteria as following.
 * Criteria 1a: Highly Cited publications
 * •The subject is among top 2% of highly cited scientists according to the Stanford/Elsevier database. 1
 * •The subject has also high citation metrics on Google scholar. 2 Here below is the list of some scholars with equal status having Wikipedia page and lesser citations on google scholar than this subject for comparison:
 * 1. Ahmad Reza Djali, his Google Scholar Metrics 3
 * 2. Saba Valadkhan, her google scholar Metrics 4
 * 3. Neda Alijani, his google scholar Metrics 5
 * Criteria 1d: The subject has served as editorial board member of known scientific journals. 6 7 8 9 10
 * Criteria 1e. The subject had been selected in competitive fellowships 11 12
 * Criteria 2: The subject has been awarded academic awards. 13
 * As per the criteria for academic peoples, the subject is notable enough for having separate Wikipedia page. Joidfybvc (talk) 10:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Joidfybvc (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.
 * Sorry, but I think you are trying to hard:
 * 1a: None of those mentioned qualify just on h-factor. However, Djali is notable politically, Valadkhan has major awards as does Alijani.
 * 1d: No evidence in article. In any case just being on an editorial board does not qualify as notable.
 * 1e: All his fellowships are minor, none meet the criteria.
 * 2: Minor awards which also don't meet notability criteria.
 * Ldm1954 (talk) 05:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 12:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 10:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  10:46, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  13:06, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak keep: I'm not sure the academic awards are notable; his publication records seems ok. Just passing academic notability. Lots of fluff now in the article, but we can edit that. Oaktree b (talk) 13:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: I am changing my !vote as delete because of the insufficient sources to meet WP:NPROF. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 18:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. First off, nobody deserves an article on Wikipedia. We are a private charity, not a government agency, and in 2024, everyone knows, or should know that, so free speech protections don't apply. Secondly, I don't see any evidence that he passes the WP:PROF test, either by citations in an index, or reaching a distinguished or full professorship. Finally, the burden is now on the defenders of an article that a living person has gotten significant coverage in reliable and independent sources, which I do not see here. Bearian (talk) 15:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. The claims made earlier that his publication record is strong are inappropriate -- his h-factor is moderate but not notable. None of his awards are major. He definitely does not pass WP:NPROF; it is not a close call, he is far below the bar. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete We have many researchers around the globe who are working in different fields. Only those who get coverage in reliable and secondary sources get to have an article here. I agree with both of the users above that he does not pass the threshold for notability. Keivan.f  Talk 21:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete I have never recommended that an article be rejected on the basis of their h-factor alone. I tend to look at other metrics, and in particular I look at the kinds of articles published and the rigor and selectivity of the journals that they appear in. Unfortunately, this subject's most widely cited publications are all review articles. Such work represents important contributions to the literature, but does not confer notability for our purposes here under C1 of WP:NPROF as it does not represent contributions to new knowledge. Incidentally reaching full professorships is not, by itself, sufficient to satisfy WP:NPROF - but someone who has done that often does end up meeting one or more of the six criteria, or gains notability as an author instead. Anyway, the subject does not meet the WP:NPROF standard in any of its criteria, and the article should be deleted. Qflib (talk) 04:25, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't have a strong opinion on his notability, but I have some concerns instead about verifiability of the current article. It lists him as working at some institutions in Iran. A Google Scholar profile under the same name describes a toxicologist who, it claims, works in the US, at Wayne State University. The only verification of this that I can find is a Wayne State poison center hotline newsletter  stating that they hired someone by this name last year, but he does not otherwise appear on their web site. Is the Wayne State toxicologist the same person as the Iranian toxicologist? If so, what can we verifiably say about working in the US instead of Iran now? If they are different people, is the publication record mixed up between them? I don't know, but these are the things we should be able to verify from reliable sources to have an article. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:42, 10 June 2024 (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.