Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nauman Chaudhry

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. Consensus is for deletion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:14, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nauman Chaudhry[edit]

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

No indication of notability. Written like a Resume and initial edit summary indicates it was originally speedy deleted for advertising. Only references are directory entries rather than significant coverage. Google searches not finding significant coverage. noq (talk) 20:34, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Cameron11598 (Converse) 06:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG - sources are directories only, including the US News entry. Wikipedia is not a CV. Scr★pIron^IV 18:20, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nothing at all for any applicable notability and improvements, simply not convincing. Notifying DGG for analysis. SwisterTwister talk 04:34, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete ~~Uncertain~~ We could delete as promotional , but he is actually somewhat notable as an expert under WP:PROF based on citations: 338, 102, 69, 61, 58 .... all in first rate specialty journals, most where's he's clearly the main author. I am not going to rewrite, but if someone does the article is fixable. The first step in evaluating an academic is to look in Google Scholar, and anyone can do it. DGG ( talk ) 03:29, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 11:06, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm not convinced that the notability here goes beyond writing a good many papers that were published in academic journals, and WP:PROF tells us that this criterion alone is not sufficient for meeting its notability guidelines. Two comments about the Google Scholar results. First, there are several academics whose names are "Nauman Chaudhry", some of whom also share the same middle initial as the subject here. Of the five papers cited by User:DGG, only three are by the subject. Second, the most widely-cited paper on the list (the one with 338 citations) is not one for which the subject was a primary author. NewYorkActuary (talk) 16:50, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about that one. DGG ( talk ) 04:18, 2 June 2016 (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.