Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nasir PA

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. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nasir PA[edit]

Disputed prod. I'm not convinced this person is notable enough for inclusion. Martin 15:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Salih (talk) 16:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Week Keep. The second article certainly metions him and gives a little background, and seems to be a reliable source. The article at the moment is more about the product than him, and feels a touch promotional. The first link isn't about him, and the third doesn't appear to work. I wouldn't lose sleep if this went, and an article about the product is probably more relevant than one on him. --Ged UK (talk) 16:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete I can find no other sources about this person. The only hint at notability here seems to be this patent, but it's pending, not even approved, and certainly, not every U.S. patent is notable, nor does having a patent automatically make one notable--rather the vast majority of patents are NOT notable, so something else is needed here to establish notability. Heck, I even get more google hits (including in third-party news sources) than this guy! If he gets a page, I want my own page too! And that's just wrong. Cazort (talk) 02:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the person who seconded the prod with Wikipedia is not a resume service. This veers very close to speedy deletion territory as spam. This is also a WP:COATRACK. While the article has improved since I seconded the prod, I still stand by my former comment (although it is no longer a coatrack about his invention). B.Wind (talk) 02:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A patent pending for approval is not enough to establish the notability. Fails WP:BLP. Salih (talk) 03:23, 21 February 2009 (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.