Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hardik A. Gohel

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. T. Canens (talk) 11:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hardik A. Gohel

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

This article has superficial referenciness, but the sources are remarkably thin. I found the article because he was listed on the advisory board of a predatory open access publisher, never a good sign. Look at the section "CSI contribution" for example. A secretary of a local chapter and participated in a committee. The guy only achieved his PhD in 2015 and it was not from a significant research university. I do not think this meets WP:GNG, and I have suspicions that the creator, a WP:SPA, may have a conflict of interest. Guy (Help!) 10:44, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete almost no one is notable within 2 years of getting their PhD, even from the top universities, no indication this guy is an exception to that rule.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:28, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Delete This article includes international achievements of Hardik A Gohel and also having good publications and awards in youngest age. Content and References are now almost improved and will be more satisfactory by the time. Wikipedia can move this article in biography of living person but I am very sure this article will be popular like a viral as it is having average 90-95 views within 3 days of creation . I request you to please keep this article. Please support. Meera Mac (talk) 6:07 PM, 3 January 2017 (UTC) — Meeramac (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. CheckUser blocked.

Keep this article as this is just a start class and I am assuring it will improve within a month or two. The profile is above average and content and references should improve which can be done by the time. Hagohel (talk) 8:16 PM, 3 January 2017 (UTC) — Hagohel (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. CheckUser blocked.

Positive for article Hardik A. Gohel

I have read the article, Hardik A. Gohel. I am considering it enough strong for Wikipedia — Agupadhyay (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. CheckUser blocked.

Delete. Sources don't demonstrate notability. - MrOllie (talk) 18:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I accepted because of the sole claims of IEEE membership which satisfies notability, however, it's unsourced and there's nothing else convincing. If sourcing can confirm the IEEE membership, then that's different. SwisterTwister talk 20:34, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
IEEE membership satisfies notability? As far as I know anybody with a bachelor's degree in a related field qualifies as a professional member. Not a very high bar. - MrOllie (talk) 20:57, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NACADEMIC explicitly lists being a fellow member of the IEEE as sufficient. Normal membership might not satisfy the requirement though. Regards So Why 10:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser note: Meeramac and Agupadhyay are Confirmed socks of Hagohel. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hagohel.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:34, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.