Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Sikander Mehdi


 * 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 Whilst various people have asserted 'notability' (whatever they mean by that) no sources have been provided for any of those assertions. This is a BLP and even after this scrutiny remains substantially unverified. -Docg 00:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Syed Sikander Mehdi

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No sources, notability not established. Delete. Jefferson Anderson 19:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.  -- Pete.Hurd 19:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * One of a family of pages created by User:Az haris, whose talk page contains several warnings for Wikipedia misbehavior. Anthony Appleyard 20:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * and one of a similarly large number of grouped AfDs by another user. Now let's get to the subjectsDGG 05:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * DO NOT DELETE. One should amend the articles or prescribe changes rather voting for the deletion. The text looks similar as the scholars are of a same field and the works they have done are almost similar. The scholars are noted in their fields and their entries should remain intact. Sources and references can be clearly seen under External Links. 14:28 & 14:29, 14 April 2007 User:221.132.113.214
 * Weak keep I think he barely passes notability. I didn't check the external links, but they might help sort this out. YechielMan 16:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * &emsp; Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  &emsp; Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WjBscribe 00:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak keep, I agree with YechielMan on the level of notability. However, the articler is sourced and could be tightened and improved. It meets the standard of the day, which is not any type of resounding endorsement. --Stormbay 00:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Very Weak Keep Although an academic he is not really a scholar--he has never obtained a Ph.D., and the twenty nine articles & four book chapters are respectable, but not scholarly. He therefore has to be judged by his public and administrative career--he is clearly what is sometimes called a "public intellectual", It's hard to judge the importance of this from the CV; proper references are needed; if the career is as specified there must be newspaper accounts.  DGG 03:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * weak delete not having a PhD is not really an issue, the question of notability does not boil down to academic rank, but rests on impact outside of their academic circle (29 articles and 4 book chapters is modest). I think the real claim to notability made here is "invited by TV channels as an expert for their Current Affairs programs" and "completed several reasearch[sic] projects and has arranged & participated in several dozen national, regional and international seminars/workshops/conferences" I'd really like to see some kind of source describing the Local/National impact level of this press coverage, "completing a research project" doesn't seem worthy of mention, nor does merely participating in attending seminars/workshops/conferences. Pete.Hurd 04:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are uncountably numerous academics who participate in regional, national, and international conferences. I'm always willing to consider people who may be at the edge of WP:N, but the credentials listed here don't demonstrate to me any notability beyond that of a fairly distinguished tenured professor pretty much anywhere. Lemonsawdust 07:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * weak delete per the article itself needs a stronger ref base the_undertow talk  08:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, while I support having more pages about academics... he doesn't appear to have contributed to any major journals nor does he has any notable monographs or books, he doesn't hold a Ph. D., I can't find him cited anywhere, he doesn't teach at particularly well known university. As far as I can tell the immigration specialist in my (small) department is more well known than him... and I would question if he should have an article. gren グレン 12:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not appear to satisfy WP:PROF. Fewer than 30 articles published plus 4 book chapters and no degree beyond a masters is no that impressive. Edison 14:31, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Per discussion above, his accomplishments seem acceptable but not exceptional for an academic. Seems to be an average professor but not more than that. —David Eppstein 03:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The person seems quite notable and a Google Search produces many links. The article could do with expansion and referencing, though. → Aktar (talk • contribs) &mdash; 10:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Week Keep He has twice been quoted by The Guardian as an authority. Specifically, the September 18th 2001 and August 11th 2001 editions of The Guardian.  I strongly suspect many more references could be found if we knew how his name was spelled in Urdu and the other languges of Pakistan.Chris Croy 12:53, 24 April 2007 (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.