Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emad Rahim

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. —Tom Morris (talk) 19:41, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Emad Rahim[edit]

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

I don't think he meets either WP:PROF or the GNG. The article is furthermore almost promotional enough for a G11 speedy deletion: it relies on Linkedin and similar sources, lists in-college and alumni awards without any major awards, lists only a small number of journal articles in very minor journals without exact referencing (e.g. " International Journal of Project Organisation and Management" indexed in no major indexes, from a publisher called Inderscience--probably named to trade on the reputation of Wiley's imprint Interscience), talks about his career in vague terms: "multiple universities" , and "invited to lecture at" is not an element of notability,. I tried to fix it, but I gave up, as there was not enough underlying notability to be worth the effort. 'DGG (at NYPL) (talk) 17:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the nomination advanced. Run of the mill Business administration professor with no claim of notability. The Legend of Zorro 15:32, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article was contributed entirely by Morning277 sock-puppets, leaving its neutrality in doubt. —rybec 07:43, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per great nom by DGG. I don't think it's close enough for G11 because there are some claims of notability, but none that reach the WP bar. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 21:56, 20 July 2013 (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.