Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larbi Sadiki

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. — Cirt (talk) 00:10, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Larbi Sadiki

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

I have reason to believe this article was created and written by Larbi Sadiki. KT1854 has contributed almost exclusively to this article. He/she also published the photo of Larbi claiming ownership. I also think HM87 and this IP are possibly socks of KT. If my assessments are true, the article is a blatant violation of WP:COI. The article is also mostly dependent on sources primarily originating from Sadiki's place of work. Wikifan^{Be nice} 08:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 13:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have no time right now to look into this, but the article asserts that Sadiki is a regular expert on TV, which would probably satisfy any concerns about notability. Unless that is somehow incorrect, I don't see why this is at AfD. COI is absolutely no reason for AfD. And while it is discouraged to write an autobio, it is not forbidden. Maybe a reason for cleanup, absolutely not a reason for AfD. Perhaps the nom can give us some good reasons why this fails WP:BIO or WP:GNG? --Crusio (talk) 14:29, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is he a regular expert on television? I understand it is traditionally frowned upon to write your own article and operate sockpuppets to do so. I don't see any sources outside of his own work and link to university website. I'm just going off what the article has right now. If someone other than Larbi can "cleanup" this can be closed. Wikifan^{Be nice} 22:53, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. GS gives h index of 7. Too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:43, 23 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Comment The article should be deleted - the subject doesn't meet the notability criteria for academics and seems be blatant self promotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maturescence (talk • contribs) 02:53, 27 June 2011 (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.