Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hootan Dolati

Hootan Dolati

Hootan Dolati (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)

The subject does not pass WP:GNG, nor it passes Politicians notability criteria. At most we can say that it's too soon for him to be an encyclopedic entry. Saff V. (talk) 07:30, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

• Keep The Persian-language Wikipedia article is very well developed. Using Google translate, from what I can make out, there do seem to be very good number of reliable sources about the article subject. Reliable sources do not have to be in English, here. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:23, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

hi see w:fa:ویکی‌پدیا:نظرخواهی_برای_حذف/هوتن_دولتی--جسورانه (talk) 15:39, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

• Thank you. If I understand correctly, that is the Persian language article deletion discussion, where so far the consensus is unanimously to keep, is that not so? And that the editor there who attempted to have this article deleted has actually been blocked. Moreover, I see that the nominator here, Saff V., has been active in creating articles about Iranian regime military figures and has been previously warned about edit warring, so I do wonder if there's some politically motivated agenda to erase articles about opponents of the Iranian regime and if the nominator is not part of that. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:57, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Derakhshan This article was written by Hootandolati (talk · contribs) This is an ads. [Ads Iranian].--جسورانه (talk) 16:05, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The SPI that was declined for lack of evidence? I don't see what that proves. As best I can tell, we appear to have a multi-faceted inter-Wiki campaign to remove articles about a notable anti-regime activist, and this Afd is part of it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:18, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

So just to recap: 1) the editor who opened the Afd at the Persian wiki has been blocked for abusing multiple accounts 2) the Afd there was unanimously opposed and closed as keep for obvious notability 3) the SPI opened here by SPA User:111695 has been declined for a complete lack of evidence. The natural next step would be to see if User:111695 is another sock of the indef blocked Persian sockpuppeteer, but that's not a matter for here. As for the nominator here, who is an experienced editor, for now I leave it to his judgement to see what part he wishes to continue to play in all this. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:35, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

I've asked the blocking admin at the Persian wiki, who does have an account here, and is in fact a Steward, to take a look. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:49, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

• Delete: He does not pass our WP:GNG test. I also think it's WP:TOOSOON. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:31, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
• Keep A Google search shows him covered in numerous documents and pages by governments and international organizations, as well as a few other websites. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 19:05, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Ramaksoud2000: and where are those sources deeply dealing with the subject? I mean, as you know, here's an encyclopedia and we don't rely on passing mentions. --Mhhossein ^talk 19:09, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

They are all on the Persian language wiki article -- which according to your userpage is a language you are able to read. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:13, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Did I ping you?! Anyway, yes I can read persian and that's why I'm supporting the deletion. --Mhhossein ^talk 19:28, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't need your permission to make a comment at Afd, regardless of whether you ping me or not. I restate that the reliable sources on Persian-language wiki article -- which was speedily kept at Afd -- constitute significant coverage in reliable sources, from what I can tell using Google Translate. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:33, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The sources are here, as linked at the top. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 19:35, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the google search results link Ramaksoud2000. But, could you please say which of those millions of results brought up by google are sources dealing with the source in depth and hence proving the notability? --Mhhossein ^talk 19:40, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

And I just want to remind everyone that reliable sources need not be in the English language. The totality of the Farsi sources appear better than what we find in English, far as we can tell. There are quite a few strong ones at fa:هوتن_دولتی. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:44, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the cooperation but your misleading this Mhhossein-Ramaksoud2000 dialogue is really annoying and dubious. I would be thankful if you could avoid doing that and commenting elsewhere on this page. Btw, how can you verify that those sources are strong and deep? --Mhhossein ^talk 19:50, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

US Embassy, UK Gov, Amnesty International, Amnesty USA, and other sources that I can't assess the reliability of at the moment all cover him in detail. There are other trivial mentions as well. Those are just the English language sources. I don't believe I will be able to convince you though. You appear to have a close connection to this topic. I will not be responding further because you are rudely telling another editor not to contribute. All views are welcome. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 19:53, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Ramaksoud2000. Yes, I daresay it's pretty clear to objective editors what's going on here. Please don't worry on my account. Now, as for reliable sources, in Farsi, yes I think I can thanks to the wonders of Google Translate. He is mentioned in the headlines of multiple articles such as here, here (the Voice of America], here. This appears to be an excellent list of abstracts of further articles. There's no shortage of coverage; this is just a sampling. Now, some of the multiple refs may be judged to be blogs rather than news media, but given the Iranian theocratic regime's control, we're unlikely to find coverage in state news organs. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:00, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, I welcome his views, but in its correct place. Jumping right into others dialogue is not respected. By those reliable sources, do you mean that virtual Embassy? Yes I think this is good but that virtual embassy and a source by an advocacy group is rarely considered reliable. Mhhossein ^talk 20:08, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

• Comment: Besides the coverge issue, there are major concerns according to WP:BIO1E. He's here just for a single event and for nothing more. The article is certainly a WP:PSEUDO. --Mhhossein ^talk 20:13, 18 December 2016 (UTC)