Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zarah Ghahramani


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 19:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Zarah Ghahramani

 * – ( View AfD View log )

fails WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR. this person co wrote a notable book. coverage relates more to the book than the person. . LibStar (talk) 08:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is naturally a difficult issue, as the person is famous for her biography. However, there are sources that can be used. Perhaps her biography could be merged into her article? Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:04, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:43, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:36, 1 June 2011 (UTC)




 * Keep – subject meets WP:AUTHOR #1, #3, #4. Nomination did not follow custom by not notifying original editor. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:23, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * you have provided no sources to prove #1, #3, #4 are met. LibStar (talk) 08:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * See the links provided above: ; e.g. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/29/protesters-fate-in-tehran/
 * #4 says: "The person's work either [...] (c) has won significant critical attention": see My Life as a Traitor. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — -- Cirt (talk) 09:31, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep While the article is a stub and should be expanded, the author is extremely notable having been published with a major book publisher, winning or being shortlisted for significant literary prizes, and having a number reliable sources which support notability. I've added information and references to the article but it still needs work. However, the fact that an article still needs more work is not a valid reason to delete it for notability reasons.--SouthernNights (talk) 13:56, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The article has potential and is well sourced. SwisterTwister (talk) 21:53, 7 June 2011 (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.