Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gunay Aliyeva

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. After much-extended time for discussion, there is a narrow but clear consensus that sources provided for this subject do not amount to encyclopedic notability. One "keep" !vote made by a now-indefblocked sockpuppet has been given no weight (and was itself merely a statement of agreement with an inapplicable argument by another participant). BD2412 T 00:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gunay Aliyeva

[edit]

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

Gunay Aliyeva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enough independent and reliable sources to prove its notability. In Azerbaijani Wikipedia, they keep the articles if they exist in other languages. Therefore, it's been created in Turkish and English Wikipedia. Currently, it's also nominated for deletion in the Turkish Wikipedia and will be deleted soon (actually it eas deleted but the creator appealed the result and we continue with more "delete" comments). Nanahuatl (talk) 20:06, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:27, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:27, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:27, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Popularity does not equal notability. If we created articles for everyone who went on TV, we would've had millions of more articles. Going on TV is not even a criteria. ~StyyxTalk? ^-^ 19:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
it was deleted in TrWiki --Kemalcan (talk) 18:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please conduct the AfD process truthfully.--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 19:55, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 21:02, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Sources don't appear to add up to a person that would pass WP:GNG Dexxtrall (talk) 21:38, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: enough to pass notability. (About argument) it was deleted in TrWiki - Wikipedia itself does not consider itself a reliable source.

Including sections in other languages. So this is not an argument. Additionally, see WP:AADD. --Araz Yaquboglu (talk) 17:52, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We don't simply say "Delete because it was deleted from the TR-wiki", we carry the reasons over: in this case not enough sources to pass notability, which is an argument that can be used on each project, see WP:1XL. ~StyyxTalk? ^-^ 06:22, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Turks and Azerbaijanis should not resolve this issue, the British should resolve it by consensus, I ask my Turkish colleagues not to make efforts on this issue.--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 20:20, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
what ~StyyxTalk? ^-^ 06:29, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - American chiming in here. I believe she fails English Wikipedia's WP:GNG and WP:ACADEMIC if you want to go there regarding her medical career. While yes, she appears on a TV show, that doesn't inherently mean you're notable or meet our inclusion guidelines. One source in the article is an interview, the closest thing to an reliable secondary source. The others are passing mentions or photographs from events she's hosted. Perhaps there are more non-English sources, but, I struggled to find any online. Missvain (talk) 17:03, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • :) Dear Madam, The comment you wrote was your personal opinion. It is wrong to reach a consensus by voting with a personal opinion, if a person is well-known in the country and as you can see, even the administrators of the Azerbaijani Wikipedia commented that the article should remain, this means that she is an important and well-known surgeon in her country.--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 17:52, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: This figure does not meet notability criteria. The news stories cited mention her (usually quoting her at a conference) but mostly (with one very notable exception) give us very little information about her. In fact, many of the statements about the doctor in this Wikipedia article are not supported by the articles they cite & probably need to be removed as miscitations. I'll get on the source verification in a couple hours; my guess is that there won't be much that is verifiable. That in itself may be a good indication of lack of notability. Pathawi (talk) 17:08, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Update: I went thru the sources cited in the article—which are the same as those that Elşad İman lists above—& most failed verification. There's very little in the article as it stands that is supported by the existing sources. These sources are of varying WP:RS: We have that she finished high school in 2000 from an interview on an Azerbaijani government family health Website, as well as a few years of her training history. (The latter part actually didn't pass verification, as it was linked to another Website, but I found the info at the source mentioned, so I fixed the citation.) We have that she's a member of the Turkish Ophthalmological Association from the OCLC's International Standard Name Identifier. That's it. Nothing else passes verification. None of what passes verification is sufficient for notability. My guess is that all or almost all of the information listed is true, & was written by someone who knew a fair bit about Dr Əliyeva but who wasn't careful with sourcing that information. This reinforces my support of deletion. Pathawi (talk) 20:05, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
famous: 1) ISNI authoritative check, 2) baku.news, 3) Azerbaycan24.com, 4) qafqazinfo.az: looks very authoritative in terms of WP:VERIFY. Information from independent authoritative sources is sufficient to save the article.
If TV channels go to a doctor, it means that a person is a famous doctor in her field, so there is no doubt that he is a famous person. Her name is also mentioned in the book as a doctor, author of scientific articles and organizer of scientific courses.
She spent her medical internship at the American Academy of Ophthalmologists (AAO) and the University of California, Los Angeles, and also did an internship at the World Health Organization. She is medical sciences doctor.--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 21:47, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: You're WP:bludgeoning this process. It's completely inappropriate to reply to everyone who disagrees with you in a deletion discussion if you don't have anything new to say. The sources you are repeatedly listing don't pass verification for the facts for which they're cited: They mostly do not contain significant coverage of any facts about Dr Əliyeva; they just happen to include her name. It's not clear to me at all that ISNI is an indicator of notability. Pathawi (talk) 02:51, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete As per source analysis by Pathawi. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:02, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • (?) Is it enough to save the article when adding new sources? or do you insist on deleting the article, no need for any source or link? --Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 16:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply: In general, you can edit an article to improve it during the deletion discussion. If you are able to demonstrate notability through legitimate citation of reliable sources, it may be possible to change people's minds. However, it would be worth your while to come to an understanding of others' rejection of the current citations & current claims for notability; otherwise, edits might be wasted effort. Do you have a professional relationship with Dr Əliyeva? Some of the information in the article doesn't appear in the cited sources. Did you add it? Do you know where it comes from? Pathawi (talk) 17:03, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply: Yes, she was my doctor, and I know that what is written is the truth and information from the first sources.--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 18:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply: Okay. That complicates things a little bit. You might want to consider whether this means that you have a conflict of interest. I would think that it does. You might want to read the first part of WP:COI. Pathawi (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      @Pathawi:, in the Turkish Wikipedia, we are aware of it. Therefore, some articles that the user has created are deleted and the user has blocked indefinetely. In the Azerbaijani Wikipedia, they don't delete articles if they exist in another language. So they create them in the Turkish or Russian Wİkipedia first, and also sometimes in the English Wikipedia. That complicates things even more I suppose :) The user is clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia, but for "narrow self-interest or promotion of themselves or their business". Nanahuatl (talk) 21:52, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Reply: In this case, what needs to be done to put everything in order. I would be very grateful if you would help me to take the right step in this direction.--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 18:54, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • Reply: If from WP:COI you agree that you've got a conflict of interest—& a personal relationship with the subject generally does indicate a conflict of interest—you should probably hold off on editing the page itself directly for the moment. However, it's still appropriate to list any previously unmentioned reliable sources that demonstrate notability here in the deletion discussion. In doing so, you ought to disclose your conflict of interest. There's information on how to do this at WP:COI. You can find out more about how to pursue edits when you've got a COI at WP:COI, and I'd be happy to help you navigate that. I suppose I should also say: Editing with a conflict of interest can be disruptive. You really shouldn't ask other editors to consider additional sources unless they're substantively different from those you've already put forward. So: Read WP:COI. Read WP:GNG. Finally, consider the perspective that no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Pathawi (talk) 02:28, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply The book "Azerbaijani women" by French writer Jean-Louis Guro contains an article about Dr. Aliyeva and her successful work as an ophthalmologist-surgeon in the country, as well as the author of many scientific articles.
Since there are articles about this person in other books, I created an article on Wikipedia, I did not create an article because the doctor was my only doctor, I created it because she has a high reputation in the country.--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 10:31, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I Googled the French & English titles that appear in the photograph & could not find any mention of this book. I haven't been able to find any publication information, or any mention anywhere other than government press releases. None of these mention Dr Əliyeva. Pathawi (talk) 14:04, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Media Tv 1, Media Tv 2, Media Tv 3, Azerbaijani television channel --Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 13:21, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • These are all talk programme segments where Dr Əliyeva talks about opthalmological & eye surgical issues, right? They're not about the doctor herself. Correct? Pathawi (talk) 14:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • I imagine this is frustrating for you, but I wish you would stop throwing up links without explanation and read WP:GNG and WP:RS. There should be multiple secondary sources about Dr Əliyeva and independent of Dr Əliyeva. They shouldn't be by publicists like Mr Gouraud. They should be more than trivial mentions, & should say something substantive about Dr Əliyeva herself. Pathawi (talk) 14:17, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply Unfortunately, you do not know Azerbaijani. The footage on state television speaks of him personally and even the TV presenter is surprised that Aliyeva is conducting undeniable activity in the field of medicine.--Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 17:01, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The link to state TV is not to a video: I think you made a small copy-paste error. But before you bother fixing it: Is this really going to be a reliable source that says something significant? A passing mention that an ophthalmologist does ophthalmology isn't much. Is this more substantive than that? Pathawi (talk) 17:54, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Actually, I'm going to check out now. I'm travelling starting tomorrow & don't feel like trying to verify any more sources about the good doctor. I feel like I'm bludgeoning Elşad at this point with the same calls to read the same guidelines & policies, & I don't want to continue in that position. It feels like engagement is perhaps just dragging out this process pointlessly. My position in favour of deletion remains unchanged by sources which are either unverifiable or appear to only have trivial coverage of the doctor herself. Pathawi (talk) 18:02, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply I am adding new sources. English news, Doctor info, aqreqator.az, ARB tv Gunay Aliyeva, TV interview of a foreign country --Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 19:56, 28 May 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gunay_Aliyeva&oldid=1142202664"