Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Ala

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. v/r - TP 20:22, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Ala[edit]

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

unsourced, self-promoting entry that does not meet the notability guideline in anyway -- Marmoulak (talk) 20:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 22:54, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. — — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 22:54, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It seems that he's notable, please give me a short time to improve the article. Mehran talk 06:23, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I added some info with reliable sources that showed he's notable. Mehran talk 08:46, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Websites like: [1], [2], cannot be used in an encyclopedia! Wikipedia is not an advertisement website! - Marmoulak (talk) 16:52, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Marmoulan jan, please do not delete the references, they are reliable and your revert shows that you want to inaugurate aد edit war. Please clarify why did you remove the references, and do not repeat that before I agree your reasons! Thankس Mehran Debate 16:54, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mehran, you are obviously confused about what encyclopedic "reliable" actually means! It doesn't hurt to read the rules before making such claims. The websites you have added cannot be considered reliable even by the lowest of standards. Also, I am not the one who started an edit war. You and User:in fact however, seems to be tag teaming to keep this promotional entry on Wikipedia! - Marmoulak (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And I should tell you that [3], [4] are not advertisement websites. Mehran Debate 17:08, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I beg to differ! link1 is a shady "martial arts"/"meditation" advertising website, and link2 is clearly a self-published and questionable source. The other link that you tried to include multiple times was a dead link, and now you have replaced it with an archived link, which is useless since Mr. Ala doesn't seem to be part of CSULA at the moment! even if he was a staff at CSULA, in no way does that make him a notable person. Wikipedia is neither a place for self-promotion and advertisement nor a college staff directory!! - Marmoulak (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
1. Please just for one time, read that source carefully. If you look The About at one glance, you will see that the website is for a group of researchers (Persian Gulf Study Group) and absolutely is a reliable reference without any questions. 2. I can't understand what you mean "at the moment"?! So if a person retired, he will not notable because he was [for example] a former singer "at the moment"! 3. He wasn't a staff, he was the Director of Productivity Center and has won many awards considered in that page.Mehran Debate 19:03, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am not the one with reading problem here, you are! persiangulfstudies.com is clearly a self-published and questionable source; if you had read Wikipedia's guidelines you would know this. Anyone can create a website and call themselves "researchers" and "experts", it's called self-publishing and self-promotion! Your second "source" is even worse; it's a shady "martial arts"/"meditation" advertising website that qualifies for speedy deletion. Mohammad Ala was at one time part of a collage staff, we don't know the terms of his job termination, but one thing is for certain, he is not even remotely notable; no more notable that the other 6.9 billion people living on earth!! - Marmoulak (talk) 20:47, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I respect to your opinion, you call the website self-publishing however it is an official site and got a ministry certification which you are not aware of it. Please do not label self-promotion to the things you wouldn't like. I think these discussions are ineffective, let the others judge too. All the best! Mehran Debate 03:35, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's not 'my opinion'! It's Wikipedia's guidelines. Other users have confirmed this as well. The concept of 'ministry-approved' websites only exists under an Islamist theocracy like the Iranian regime and has no meaning in Wikipedia or free societies (where Wikipedia was created in). Besides, the fact that you know this website has an Iranian regime 'ministry certification', confirms that it's a self-published, self-promotional website and violates NPOV since it's considered conflict of interest. It's seems like the more you try to defend your edits, the worse they look! I suggest you spend more time reading Wikipedia guidelines and familiarizing yourself with the concept of an Encyclopedia, which is neither an advertisement listing site, nor a government propaganda outlet. -- Marmoulak (talk) 22:22, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is not one single reliable source that mentions "Mohammad Ala" as a notable individual! - Marmoulak (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 21:29, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Too early. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:58, 21 September 2011 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete While there is at least one academic paper co-authored by him at Gscholar, I can't find any WP:RS to indicate that he is currently notable enough. This may well change with a bit more time. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:43, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see him mentioned on the United Nations website at all. If he won the "UN Award for Development Programs in Less Developed Countries", it should be mentioned somewhere. Does that award even really exist? He founded three organizations, but I can't tell if any are notable. He has published articles in a newspaper, I adding references to that. Dream Focus 04:32, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep He is notable, but the article needs to be improved. In fact ( contact ) 09:57, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What leads you to the conclusion that Ala is notable? Phil Bridger (talk) 10:01, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks In fact, now this is clear that he's notable. Mehran Debate 19:21, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those are articles written by the subject, not about him, so make no contribution to notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete - low assertion of independent notability. His organization doesn't look notable either. Off2riorob (talk) 11:27, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
and your reasons? Xxanthippe (talk) 22:35, 24 September 2011 (UTC).[reply]
  • How could Wikipedia allow this? A real person attacked by some people who are hiding behind a pseudo name? It doesn't make any sense. If anything he/she should be reported as an abuser. My information was correct and readily available. Several awards were internal such as Service Award. I was and still is the creator of IIS. I did not create this Wiki account and I AM IN FAVOR OF DELETING IT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohammad Ala (talk • contribs) 01:08, 25 September 2011 (UTC) — Mohammad Ala (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Calm down Mr. Ala, this is not an attack on you, it's just enforcing of Wikipedia's rules. A certain level of notability is required to be eligible to have an article on Wikipedia, and you don't have that (and that's fine). -- Marmoulak (talk) 03:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe you should check those links. The first two are written by the subject, rather than about him, and the rest are the barest of passing mentions, mainly citations to the subject's work. For an academic to be notable based on citations hundreds are required, not just a handful. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:29, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have checked them, two of them have been written by him. By the way, I did not check everything, these are just examples. In fact ( contact ) 13:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The only notable publication that he participated in was the second edition of 'Operations Management: Strategy and Analysis Study Guide', in which he was on of the three authors. In the other editions he has no role. Overall, there is no evidence to indicate that Mohammad Ala is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article about him. -- Marmoulak (talk) 19:23, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Then we need better examples. Aticles written by the subject, or citing him without saying anything about him, do not contribute to notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opinions please. [5] Apart from the fact that, as I pointed out before to the editor, having the first sentence begin with "Mohammad Ala is[citation needed]" is unbelievably stupid, can I get an opinion on the other edits he has once again done. Does anyone doubt "Ala established Persian Gulf Organization"? Also, http://www.iranian.com/main/member/mohammad-ala shows he hasn't just published in their blog section but also their regular section, which counts as notable enough to mention in the article. Does anyone other than Marmoulak doubt the information in his career section? [6] The guy trying to have the article deleted keeps doing odd edits to it. More opinions please. Changing the bit about the National Iranian American Council to a brief and inaccurate bit about him being mentioned in its "blog", which is clearly not what that is linked to in the reference, is wrong. Dream Focus 20:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is 'unbelievably stupid' is that you are using a user page as a reference on Wikipedia!!!! If you actually know how to read, try reading Wikipedia's rules regarding acceptable reliable sources (WP:RS), as it indicates that: Anyone can create a website, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason self-published media—whether personal websites, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable. This includes any website whose content is largely user-generated (like Iranian.com, for example!). The same goes for the so-called "Persian Gulf Organization", which just a website created by Mohammad Ala himself. -- Marmoulak (talk) 00:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Blogs are not reliable sources. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:42, 25 September 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Iranian.com is a magazine with 6 million people a month reading it. The blog section is something else. Dream Focus 23:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Iranian.com content is user generated. I have a user account on Iranian.com and have written several articles and blogs for that website myself. By the way, Iranian.com only has about 70000 viewers per month not 6 million!!. Your use of Iranian.com as a source was particularly against WP:RS as you used the user's page, written by the user himself as a source!! -- Marmoulak (talk) 00:52, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was going by what was listed in their Wikipedia article. Doesn't matter though. The user page has a list of what articles he has written, that why I link to it. I'll ask on the reliable sources noticeboard if this is a valid reliable source or not. I don't believe its all user generated, and that some of it does have an editorial process. Dream Focus 02:27, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What you believe is irrelevant here. Iranian.com's content is mostly user-generated and the site's owner, Jahanshah Javid, makes a decision to display some of the user-generated content on the front page. Ironically, Jahanshah Javid himself is not notable enough to have Wikipedia article about him, but apparently, according to you, he has the magical power to grant enormous notability to hundreds of people (including myself and Mohammad Ala)!!! -- Marmoulak (talk) 15:55, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete fails WP:GNG. If a reliable official source and citation can be found for the claim UN Award for Development Programs in Less Developed Countries ping me and I'll reconsider, because that looks gold. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. My own best efforts, and those of other editors above, have been unable to come up with any significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The sources offered have all been written by the subject, are from clearly unreliable sources, or are trivial passing mentions such as a few citations to his work. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:07, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please give a little time and try to expand the article instead of requesting for deletion. Compare the page with the first day, the article is in progress. Maybe it would be better to devote your energy to the conversations like above! Mehran Debate 20:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I emailed the guy to ask him about interviews about him or his organizations, mentioning the article about him here as well as the one for his organization at Persian Gulf Organization is up for deletion. Since we don't have anyone to search in Arabic for reliable sources, its hard to determine how notable this person and his organizations are. Hopefully he'd comment soon. Dream Focus 20:15, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Non-notable, and apparently is no longer affiliated with CSU Los Angeles. According to this wayback machine link he was a professor there at one time, but he is not currently listed in the faculty directory. And I can't find that the university currently has anything called the Productivity Center, although it apparently did (and he was part of it) in 2003. According to ratemyprofessors.com (which I realize is not a reliable source) he retired in 2006 or 2007. Google Scholar does list some articles by him, but they have received very few citations from others - not enough for WP:ACADEMIC. Maybe his activism will make him notable in the future. --MelanieN (talk) 02:17, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ACADEMIC says The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or "Distinguished Professor" appointment at a major institution of higher education and research. http://www.calstatela.edu/univ/ppa/newsrel/opaweb.htm states he won its Outstanding Professors award. Dream Focus 02:30, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is not sufficient to satisfy WP:Prof#C2. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:36, 27 September 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Is there a difference between Distinguished Professor and Outstanding Professor? Dream Focus 02:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am sure CSULA is a fine institution but it doesn't seem to be in the top 400 universities, so the answer to your question would be no. regards -- Marmoulak (talk) 05:32, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is clearly "a major institution of higher education and research". It doesn't matter that someone believes there are at least 400 universities in the world that are better. Dream Focus 06:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there is a vast difference between a Distinguished Professor and this award. Distinguished Professor is an academic position that brings with it prestige, seniority and, probably, a higher salary. Only the very top professors, based on extensive research records, obtain such a position. This Outstanding Professor award appears to be just a local prize given to five faculty members every year for good teaching - perfectly respectable, but not notability-granting. Phil Bridger (talk) 07:57, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, little to no reliably sourced information about his actual biography, little information on notable impact on scholarship; article has been misused as WP:COATRACK to add credence to his (utterly non-notable) political advocacy activities, which are currently over-emphasized in comparison with his genuine academic work. Also agree with Phil Bridger's argument just above. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:58, 27 September 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mohammad_Ala&oldid=1140115690"