Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Setareh Diba


 * 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.  Sandstein  17:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Setareh Diba

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:BLP fails WP:N and WP:V .The article lacks references (is a Unsouced BLP]]and explanation of the significance of the subject (Setareh Diba herself) rather than her parents Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. in fact in my opinion this should have been Speedy-deleted. Remembering that we want evidence of importance of Setareh Diba, not of her parents, all we are told is that she has a degree, that she has had a few poems published in magazines, and that she has written a book which is yet to be published. There is no claim of importance or significance in that. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:20, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Snow delete Like JamesBWatson, I'm inclined to argue that it's a candidate for WP:A7 (the claim that she was Miss World in 1979 would make her notable, except for the fact that she wasn't), but we're here now. Fails GNG and WP:AUTHOR, which are the only relevent guidelines. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 14:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The article doesn't even claim she was Miss World: it merely claims that her mother was, which would not make the daughter notable. However, her mother wasn't Miss World either. In fact the only statement in the article for which I have been able to find a reliable source is that Mahmoud Hossein Diba (presumably the same person called Mahmoudhossein Diba in the article) wrote a book about gas. (The article says "many books": I can find only one.) That person may or may not be notable, and he may or may not be the father of the subject of the article (no sources that I can find), but it's of little or no relevance anyway, as we still have absolutely no claim of significance for the subject of the article herself. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, you're right. Can we A7 it now, please? Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 18:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete - There isn't even a real assertion of notability. -- Whpq (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - I wouldn't have CSD'd this (IMO, there is a very slight assertion of importance), but there's no claim to notability for sure.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  19:15, 5 January 2012 (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.