Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saffa Riffat


 * 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 keep. Article needs a cleanup as it's currently a soup of obscure acronyms. I'll tag accordingly.  A  Train ''talk 07:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Saffa Riffat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Overly promotional article full of stuff you would find on a resume (WP:NOTCV). Severely undersourced. Mostly WP:OR. Also is an autobiography by a WP:SPA who already had this page deleted once before. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:06, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * NOTE - One of the main sources for the article is a dropbox link to Saffa Riffat's resume. WP:NOTCV and clear WP:COI. -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:56, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:13, 1 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes WP:Prof on GS citations. BLP is overly promotional and needs to be cut down to 10% of present size. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:18, 1 October 2016 (UTC).
 * Keep and I will be willing to restore it if the copyvio is simply removed, the list of honorary and special professorships (which is numbering at over 20 now) is by far enough. This by itself will be enough, since although it seems he's not a significant publisher of books, WP:PROF is certainly enough. SwisterTwister   talk  04:22, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: I would consider the article to be a hoax. I've tagged it under CSD G3. 2600:1:B14D:7DDE:1083:AF16:FFFD:3BBA (talk) 23:42, 2 October 2016 (UTC) — 2600:1:B14D:7DDE:1083:AF16:FFFD:3BBA (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Would 3 edit spa please explain why BLP is a hoax? The person exists and has adequate GS citations. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:48, 2 October 2016 (UTC).
 * even as the original nominator for deletion I agree with you both. -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:48, 3 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep as per previous keep arguments. Also, I have cleared quite a deletion tag farm from the article, most having been applied in bad faith. Safiel (talk) 01:56, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - article reduced from 15KB when nominated here down to 3.5KB now. Some real concerns about COI editing lately, but there are refs which show him to be a Professor here and by convention, full Professors of UK universities are deemed intrinsically notable. It would benefit greatly from the subject of the article stopping editing and the addition of a few independent editors adding balanced text with refs.  Velella  Velella Talk 14:29, 3 October 2016 (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.