Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hatem Bazian

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. Secret ^account 04:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hatem Bazian[edit]

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

This subject fails both WP:PROFESSOR and WP:BASIC biographical requirements. Mainly, is neither heavily cited, nor a named chair, nor the subject of substantial coverage in reliable sources. He doesn't seem to have accomplished anything notable in academia or any other field. JFHJr (㊟) 03:24, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I think -- though only per GNG, not per PROF. The only real reason has to do with his apparent role in co-founding Zaytuna College, as per this source (there are quite a few others). There's also a good number of news articles in general, though mainly because he seems like a "go-to" guy for quotes when there's a news story about Muslim students; I agree that in the main it isn't "substantial coverage" about him. But a brief article that emphasises his role in co-founding a new college seems worthwhile; I'm open to persuasion otherwise, though. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 04:14, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

per WP:BLP1E if his only notability is regarding the founding of the university, then at best, the page should be a redirect. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:30, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Clearly fails WP:PROF, and the paltry amount of WP:RS is insufficient to meet WP:GNG. Qworty (talk) 05:10, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 18:10, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:PROF, and Zaytuna College remains an unaccredited institution as of 2012, according to our article, so any notability from being a major officer of an academic institution doesn't apply. I agree that he seems to be the spokesperson of choice when people go looking for on-campus inflammatory quotes, but that's not really a basis for serious notability. Ray^Talk 02:30, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete COI or team editing issues aside, the subject fails WP:ACADEMIC, and I see no indication that WP:GNG is being met either. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the article does not show that he has ever recieved wide coverage in multiple, reliable independent sources. being a "founder" of an unaccredited academic institution does not make him notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete For the same reasons identified above. Kabirat (talk) 08:10, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete For the same reasons identified by other editors. George Custer's Sabre (talk) 03:27, 7 April 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.