Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imran Ahmed Chowdhury

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. AustralianRupert (talk) 05:33, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Imran Ahmed Chowdhury[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)

Vanity piece on a non-notable individual. The sources used on the article are either WP:PRIMARY and/or non-WP:RS. Subject of the biography does not satisfy the criteria listed under WP:BIO and WP:GNG. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 05:33, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:35, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:35, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:35, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:36, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:38, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:38, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Almost the whole thing is cited to himself, except for one puffy review of his restaurant which I suppose establishes that he's technically a restaurateur, but certainly not that he's a notable one. 199.247.43.170 (talk) 08:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - (speedy or snow) fails GNG, poorly sourced (including wikilinks in Refs) with links to his own work. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 12:25, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Lots of puffery. Ostensibly has plenty of refs - but when actually checking them they end up being non-reliable and/or not mentioning our subject. Not much in my WP:BEFORE in English. Icewhiz (talk) 13:45, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails NPOV/NOR. Not clearly encyclopedic, as it isn't clear what an NPOV version of an article would look like. Smmurphy^(Talk) 16:54, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Could have been a speedy delete. Edwardx (talk) 19:06, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article is entirely promotional, without an acceptable source to be found in the references or in an online search. The article is vacuous enough that it probably would have been a slam dunk g11. SWL36 (talk) 19:07, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete In addition to all the reasons cited above, this article was almost surely a creation of undisclosed paid editing by SPA Plaban.0 (talk · contribs), who linked to their digital marketing firm but didn't make the required disclosure. And can whoever closes this AFD also delete File:Signature of Imran Ahmed Chowdhury.png, which is falsely said to be in public-domain and is an additional indicator of COI/UPE? Abecedare (talk) 23:05, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
COM:INUSE on d:Q30070192, but once the latter is cleared… –84.46.53.188 (talk) 21:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sources lack depth, independence and the type which shows notability. THEFlint Shrubwood (talk) 18:23, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Ostensibly has plenty of refs, Fails NPOV/NOR/GNG. --SalmanZ (talk) 21:49, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:: Apart from the obvious {{tone}} issues (plural), Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts is a "thing" (=has an enwiki page), and the other award is also no nonsense. –84.46.53.188 (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While there have been prestigious Fellows of the RSA, fellowship per se is not particularly selective or prestigious, and is essentially open to anyone who files an application and coughs up a monthly fee of £14.83. As the organisation's FAQ says, "How likely is it that my application will be accepted? Our ethos is inclusive and we value all who positively impact society. Providing there is demonstrable evidence from either your professional or civic life that you share the values outlined in the Fellowship Charter we will be pleased to welcome you into the Fellowship." Abecedare (talk) 20:21, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The other listed award, Freedom of the City, is also given to anyone on the electoral rolls for the City or London (for free), or to those who file an application and pay a "fine" of £100. These "awards" are mere fund-raising mechanisms relying on the aura created by "Fellow", "Royal", "City of London" and not reliable signs of noteworthiness. Abecedare (talk) 20:46, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for info, I only knew IEEE Fellows in WP:PROF for notability. If the awards don't help the rest of the page is hopeless, I even doubt that it is, broadly construed, English. –84.46.53.188 (talk) 21:03, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I too had to check. The organisations are frankly counting on such presumption of prestige and selectivity to generate funds/membership. See also Who's Who scam. Abecedare (talk) 21:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Totally NN. A Bangladeshi army officer, who opened a UK restaurant. The material on his charitable works is cited from the subject's own blog: not a reliable source. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:10, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article is promotional, without any reliable sources.-MA Javadi (talk) 17:10, 20 April 2019 (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.