Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syra Madad

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 no consensus. JGHowes ^talk 17:58, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Syra Madad[edit]

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

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

Midlevel "Emerging Leader in Biosecurity Fellow " with similar "emerging" awards and positions. Quoted a number of times in interviews about the NYC Covid operations; everyone available has been quoted by the NYC media, but not everyone involved in this is notable, though of course the work of all of them is important, especially to those of us living in NYC. DGG ( talk ) 00:28, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:58, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:58, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:59, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:59, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:00, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:00, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Definitely doesn't meet PROF C1 with her h-index of 2 and 20 citations. She's interviewed in several major news outlets, but it doesn't seem like any of them give more than cursory attention to her biographical background. JoelleJay (talk) 07:23, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- - - - Comment - JoelleJay why would we look at NPROF she doesn't appear to be a Proffesor. She looks like a Public Health Executive for NYC government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VirtualSwayy (talk • contribs) 01:30, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "emerging" awards sceem loud and clear "this person is not yet notable".John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Reading the sources provided in the article alone, Madad clearly meets the standards set forth by the WP:GNG. She's given not just passing mention but actual substantial, sustained coverage in multiple national and even worldwide news outlets. From the sources we have in the article alone, this very obviously isn't a case of WP:CRYSTAL. Moreover, there are many more articles giving Madad substantial coverage and/or coferring notability than just in our Wikipedia article. For example, a cursory search turned up this interview published yesterday by The Toronto Star (Canada's highest-circulation newspaper), this op-ed on ABC News by Madad less than a month ago, this interview from Al Jazeera three days ago covering Madad's opinions and biography, this seminar co-delivered by Madad at Harvard's Berkman Klein Center two weeks ago, this article from Business Insider three days ago co-authored by Madad, and I could ago on. I want to emphasize that I've always been extremely skeptical about BLP notability (as my history on AfD will show), but that there's just no way this subject falls short of the GNG. I'll add here as well that the 'Career' section of the article would be well-served by subheaders. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 18:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:33, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just passing by to point out that a search in Urdu didn't produce anything of value. M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 04:50, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 07:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:BASIC, due to the multiple independent sources that include Madad as an expert; "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." Similarly, per WP:PROF, "Criterion 7 may be satisfied, for example, if the person is frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert in a particular area," and that appears to be the case here, including due to her appearances in the Netflix documentary series Pandemic, the coverage of the documentary series, and non-local news that includes Madad as an expert, e.g. CNBC, Good Morning America, Fox News, CNN, Business Insider, People. Beccaynr (talk) 20:12, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As an update, with additions of sources I've made to the article, there are now references to two appearances on CNN, one on FoxNews, two on Good Morning America, one on MSNBC, and two on CNBC. Also added is a review of the documentary from the The Los Angeles Times that discusses Madad's role, and articles from the Toronto Star, Washington Post, and CNBC that quote Madad as an expert, and an ABC News analysis piece authored by Madad. The frequency of these appearances as an expert seems to further support notability per WP:PROF and WP:BASIC. Beccaynr (talk) 01:26, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Waek keep Based on recently found sources, I'm leaning towards keep rather than WP:TOOSOON. -Kj cheetham (talk) 09:26, 22 February 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.