Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fuad Alakbarov (2nd nomination)

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. The "keep" opinions make no attempt to discuss the problems with the sourcing pointed out by the "delete" side. Sandstein 18:11, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Fuad Alakbarov

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Fuad Alakbarov
• Articles for deletion/Fuad Alakbarov (2nd nomination)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Fuad Alakbarov (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An autobiography (1, 2) which does not pass any of the relevant notability criteria - WP:NCHESS, WP:NPOL, WP:NACADEMIC, WP:CREATIVE, WP:ANYBIO or WP:GNG. Cabayi (talk) 13:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 13:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 13:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 13:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 13:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

• Delete. Per all of the above. Autobiography that appears to have been created and solely edited by a sockpuppet after their initial article was also deleted. WP:BOMBARD: with three unrelated sources from the Guardian, openDemocracy, and politics.co.uk cited to demonstrate chess credentials despite no mention of chess in those sources. Nomination for the "Noon Award" in lede, although the award bears no notability and is not mentioned in linked article for Baron Noon. Trumped up claims of political activism re Europe Sees Syria, despite untrue figure of "two million gathered" not reflected in cited sources; worth nominating that article for deletion again also. Wrenhaven (talk) 13:40, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
• Keep. The article has been sourced well. Subject meets WP:GNG. Passes WP:NTEMP. Subject had media coverage prior to the event.

Furthermore, nominated user Wrenhaven, have a very odd track record. As you can see from here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wrenhaven

The user never contributed a lot the Wikipedia (exactly from September 2016) but suddently, pops-up randomly in 28 May 2019 and —interested in subject and knows too much about this issue, raises questions he is a sockpuppet of the banned user.

--Azerifactory (talk) 20:34, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Question : Azerifactory, he is a sockpuppet of the banned user - of which banned user? Provide evidence. "Serious accusations require serious evidence". Cabayi (talk) 12:50, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

• Delete mostly just a WP:REFBOMB of passing references, personal works, and non-reliable sources. The subject failed notability standards the first time this article was created and he doesn't pass them now. This may also be a possible WP:SALT situation as well. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:49, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

• Keep--Babək Akifoğlu (talk) 21:29, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

— Note: An editor has expressed a concern that editors have been canvassed to this discussion.

Question Babək Akifoğlu Welcome back to enwiki after your 9 month gap? Were you asked to add to this discussion? I'd expect an admin to know that this is not a vote (WP:NOTVOTE) and to provide a policy based reason for keeping the article. Cabayi (talk) 12:40, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Wild guess: Probably not. Babək Akifoğlu is a frequent contributor to az:WP, and while there would have been pinged automatically when their name was mentioned here. -- Hoary (talk) 14:00, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Hoary, I see no mention of Babək Akifoğlu prior to their !vote. Cabayi (talk) 14:06, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Try looking here. But why does this matter? -- Hoary (talk) 14:19, 1 June 2019 (UTC) Previous comment written while far too sleepy. Now I see what you (Cabayi) mean. -- Hoary (talk) 23:23, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

• Keep Seems Passes WP:NTEMP.--SalmanZ (talk) 22:21, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

— Note: An editor has expressed a concern that editors have been canvassed to this discussion.

SalmanZ, NTEMP applies after the threshold of WP:SIGCOV has been met. Where is the evidence that that threshold has been met? Cabayi (talk) 12:55, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@Cabayi: Hi, I participated in this RFC based on my initial review, nevertheless I am not persisting on my opinion. --SalmanZ (talk) 23:16, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

• Keep Düşünürəm ki, səxsin ensiklopedik olmasını sübut edən yetərincə istinad var. Hörmətlə.--Nicat49 (talk) 02:39, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Google Translation : I think there is enough evidence to prove that the person is encyclopedic. Respectfully.

— Note: An editor has expressed a concern that editors have been canvassed to this discussion.

Question Nicat49, Which of enwiki's notability criteria does he pass? It would help if you replied in English so that we might have some confidence that you understand the policies involved. Cabayi (talk) 12:32, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

My english is bad, but I read this page in azviki (Fuad Ələkbərov) and I think the article is eating enough sources, maybe I'm wrong but this is my opinion. Regards.--Nicat49 (talk) 02:44, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Nicat49, the discussion is about Fuad Alakbarov on this wiki, not about az:Fuad Ələkbərov on azwiki, and needs to be based on enwiki's policies, not WP:ILIKEIT. Cabayi (talk) 15:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

• Comment Pertinent to point out that three of the four keeps above are from sysops of the Azerbaijani Wiki (Babək Akifoğlu, Nicat49, Azerifactory). One of those three, Azerifactory, is the subject of the article in question. Wrenhaven (talk) 03:35, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
• Comment The biggest odd thing about this is Wrenhaven's obsession with this topic. Especially, this user not contributed anything major in last three years but appears to be very knowledgable, which raises huge question that how somebody so low contributing to Wiki, knows too much about banned user, without been here, which is classic case of WP:DUCK for me and I would suggest admins to do Checkuser on him.--Azerifactory (talk) 09:34, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

• The poor admins of en:WP just have a mop and a bucket. They don't have checkuser abilities. You'll have to ask a "checkuser". Please see Wikipedia:CheckUser. -- Hoary (talk) 11:18, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Hoary, Azerifactory, A checkuser was conducted yesterday and Wrenhaven was cleared. Azerifactory was already aware as he is a named party in the SPI. Cabayi (talk) 12:23, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

• Question. I read above that "The article has been sourced well." This claim (by Azerifactory) surprises me. The article says (after trivial reformatting) that "On 12 September 2015, along with few activists, he created Europe Sees Syria campaign, which gathered over two million people around cities like Glasgow, London, Berlin, Aberdeen, Athens and Barcelona to raise awareness about the European refugee crisis." Now, I am getting very old and my eyesight may be failing, but I don't notice anything about two million people in either of those "references". Are my ageing eyes overlooking something, or is this poetic licence, or what? -- Hoary (talk) 11:18, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I noticed this AfD because it popped up at WP:DSPHOTO. My main interest in the article is photography. A section within it is titled "Photojournalism". Having read Azerifactory's declaration above that "The article has been sourced well", I decided to take a closer look at this section.

The section on "Photojournalism" actually says nothing whatever about photojournalism, aside from the unsourced assertion that "He is a regular contributor to openDemocracy, The Jerusalem Post, Bella Caledonia, International Policy Digest and other online news outlets." Still, it does come with a source. The source is autobiographical, and is quoted directly well beyond the current quotation marks. This is how I would suggest rewording and reformatting what I see there now:

Alakbarov received his first camera from his father at the age of 13. According to his website:

He is passionate about capturing life and how it interacts with, adapts to and alters the immediate natural environment. On an artistic level, [he] is drawn towards street photography, the urban landscape and conceptual photography. Through his work he seeks to preserve those often missed, and seemingly insignificant, fleeting moments that make life special and a joy to behold.

His photos were exhibited at the Centre for Contemporary Arts in Glasgow.

He is a regular contributor to openDemocracy, The Jerusalem Post, Bella Caledonia, International Policy Digest and other online news outlets.

Or rather, this is how I'd suggest rewording and reformatting the section if I believed it was worth salvaging. I suspect that it should be dumped. Is some kind of article worthwhile? I'm yet to be persuaded of this, but I'm open-minded. If the biographee isn't notable for being a photojournalist, then just what is he notable for? -- Hoary (talk) 23:53, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

References

• Delete. Heavily refbombed wikipuffery, but none of the sources has more than a sentence about the subject, and most quote him or are by him rather than about him. No evidence for a pass of WP:GNG. And the analysis above suggests worse, that the references are not merely inadequate but falsified and plagiarized. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:25, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Keep not an autobiography, the author is UNRELATED to Alakbarov himself. See my comment in here. --► Sincerely: A¥×aᚢ Zaÿïþzaþ€ ⚔ (hail sithis!) 02:49, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Does it matter whether or not it's an autobiography? So far as it does matter, Azerifactory said that he was the subject of the article Fuad Viento. That article has since been deleted, but if you click on the redlink you'll see that before its deletion Azerifactory moved it to Fuad Alakbarov, with the explanation "Viento is just a nickname." (I did see your comment, Aykhan Zayedzadeh, but it's not convincing.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:37, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

• Delete inadequate sources. Xxanthippe (talk) 09:16, 2 June 2019 (UTC).
• The article tells us that "Since 2017, he is a member of a cross party group on racial equality in the Scottish Parliament." This sounds impressive. No source is given, so I googled it. Yes, he is a member of the "Scottish Parliament Cross Party Group on Racial Equality in Scotland". It seems a most worthy organization. However, quite a lot of people are members; it has few meetings (and for that rather recent meeting he sent apologies for a non-appearance); and it's rather obscure. (As "Scottish Parliament Cross Party Group on Racial Equality in Scotland" is a bit of a mouthful, I googled plain "Cross Party Group on Racial Equality in Scotland". I didn't get many hits, and most were announcements, minutes, and the like.) ¶ The man's name pops up in various places, but I don't see notability. Delete. -- Hoary (talk) 00:22, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
• Delete Refbombed article, of which the mentions of him are either primary, unreliable, or nonexistent. Easy WP:GNG fail. SportingFlyer T·C 01:11, 3 June 2019 (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.