Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raeez Lorgat


 * 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) 00:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Raeez Lorgat

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Brilliant young man, one of many so honored in the references provided. However, does not meet guidelines for WP:PROF. Few or no acceptable sources, per WP:RELIABLE. Google search offers little. JNW (talk) 02:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:28, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. GS offers nothing. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC).
 * Can argue that a google search is not the only indicator of notability. Criteria #2 of WP:PROF is "The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level." which is the case here, as backed by direct and secondary sources; will cite more sources for this particular issue. Yellowjacketboys (talk) 02:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC).
 * Comment A number are so honored each year, with the awards given to promising scholars at the high school level. Unless their later achievements gain notice, the individual winners here don't appear to merit separate articles. I interpret the guideline to refer to prestigious honors at the professional level. JNW (talk) 03:01, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Note #9 of WP:PROF says specifically "Victories in academic student competitions at the high school and university level as well as other awards and honors for academic student achievements (at either high school, undergraduate or graduate level) do not qualify under Criterion 2 and do not count towards partially satisfying Criterion 1." -- Radagast 3 (talk) 13:59, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:PROF, not enough for WP:GNG. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 14:02, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Thanks, Radagast3, for taking the time to read more of WP:PROF than I did! JNW (talk) 14:05, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, I only know because someone pointed that out to me on another AfD. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 14:14, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Will concede on the basis of the point made by Radagast. The idea behind the article was that the Subject would be considered notable on the basis of receiving many national and international awards for original research performed by him and demonstrated at ISEF 2007, and further exemplified on the basis of coverage over TV and radio interviews across South Africa (I am South African myself). If the notability guidelines specifically outlaw accomplishment in the academic context of high school/university where the accomplishment is made notable through rewards in a contest, then the article should not be included. Will mark for deletion from my user name space. - Yellowjacketboys (talk) 16:00, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Radagast, with special mention to Yellowjacketboys for being so gracious about it. It's a pleasant surprise to see the creator of an article not try to wikilawyer their way around an AFD. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 16:20, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Something I find interesting is that whilst the Subject is considered notable in his home country (South Africa), this may not hold true when (as demonstrated by requests for GS results etc) the subject's notability is scrutinized from a US/Internet coverage perspective - a distinction that is quite important when you consider that there is virtually little to no internet presence regarding news in South Africa. A difficulty I had when researching and writing for this article was how little online material was available for citation. I'm curious if there is even a procedure whereby offline sources are made available for citation? I suppose I'm more curious about this in general then in just the scope of this article.Yellowjacketboys (talk) 16:37, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sources are not required to be online. Indeed, for many historical articles, online sources may not even exist. Read WP:V and the related pages for more info on what sources are appropriate, how to cite them and other relevant info. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 16:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, offline media can be cited (see Cite news for a template), and a large amount of South African print news coverage could meet the general notability guidelines. However, in such cases it's up to the article authors to find the sources, and there are no guarantees of how much will be enough to satisfy an AfD discussion. In this particular case, I doubt that there would be enough, but there may, for example, be local politicians or religious figures who would be notable on the basis of print media coverage. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 23:44, 7 August 2010 (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.