Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seyed Mohammad Hosseini (ambassador)


 * 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. Tone 17:00, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Seyed Mohammad Hosseini (ambassador)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable living person. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:26, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - More than enough RS out there to incorporate into the article. Meatsgains (talk) 03:10, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The sources are not about him as the subject and mostly include one line references. LibStar (talk) 08:01, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 07:22, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 07:22, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 07:22, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * delete fails WP:BIO. The sources are not about him as the subject and mostly include one line references. LibStar (talk) 08:01, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  07:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:16, 11 August 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 21:40, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yes, as states, there are plenty of reliable sources. But simply having reliable sources isn't a criterion for inclusion. The requirement is: significant coverage in reliable sources that are verifiable and independent of the subject. None of the sources in Meatsgain's link, as far as I can determine, contain any significant coverage whatsoever about the subject. They are either not about the subject, or they give the subject a trivial mention, not significant coverage. ~Amatulić (talk) 07:13, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - After further examination of the sources, I realize most do not detail the subject and/or only mention him in passing. Meatsgains (talk) 15:00, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Ambassador from Iran to Saudi Arabia is a big deal, as Joe Biden would say. Iran%E2%80%93Saudi_Arabia_relations are fairly significant, so there ought to be plenty about this diplomat. Bearian (talk) 20:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * please provide actual significant coverage of this individual to demonstrate that he meets WP:BIO. another case of WP:MUSTBESOURCES. LibStar (talk) 23:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Being a "big deal" isn't an inclusion criterion on Wikipedia. History is full of obscure, non-notable ambassadors, and we don't need an article about every one of them. Asserting "there ought to be plenty about this diplomat" isn't an argument for keeping either. The fact is, there doesn't appear to be anything beyond trivial mentions about this diplomat. I've looked. If you can find examples of significant coverage, I'm happy to change my delete to keep. ~Amatulić (talk)
 * agree with above, I would think that a former admin would understand better what makes something notable. LibStar (talk) 02:53, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * After looking again for reliable sources in English, I am striking my #keep !vote. I did find a couple of poorly-translated English sources that mentioned this person, as well as many that mention a similarly-named minister in the "9th government" of Iran. The Google searches linked above don't do a good job of finding sources; I had to use my own search techniques to go deeper into the Internet. That being said, I concede there is very little, much of it shallow or from government propaganda, about this person. I kept thinking how odd that would be. Upon reflection, it's possible that this person is not really a diplomat at all, and for that reason, limits available biographical information to the public, and that's why there's so little available on the Internet compared to what should be. Perhaps that I accidentally doxed him is a reason to Delete based on WP:BLP. Bearian (talk) 12:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- a non notable official; coverage is insufficient to meet GNG. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:02, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per others - appears to lack significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Citobun (talk) 10:12, 28 August 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.