Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saffa Riffat (2nd nomination)

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 keep. (non-admin closure) ~~ OxonAlex - talk 14:15, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Saffa Riffat

[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)

Résumé-like WP:BLP of an engineer, not properly sourced as clearing our notability standards for engineers. The references here are his own résumé in a Dropbox account and the self-published website of an organization he's directly affiliated with, not reliable source coverage that would establish his notability -- and while there are awards listed in the infobox (but not addressed in the body text), every award that exists is not always an automatic free pass over WP:ANYBIO: even an award still counts as a notability claim only to the extent that the award itself can be reliably sourced as a notable one, and people are not exempted from having to have any non-primary sourcing just because the article has the word "award" in it. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt Saffa Riffat from having to have much better sources than this. Bearcat (talk) 18:51, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:51, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:51, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Manually adding up his GS citations gives an h-index of 45, which in any field is enough for WP:PROF#C1. Being a Fellow of the CIBSE and the IMechE, as well as a member of the European Academy of Sciences [1][2] also looks like it's enough for WP:PROF#C3. The "news" search linked above retrieves a decent mix of items reporting on his work [3][4][5][6]. XOR'easter (talk) 19:53, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 20:13, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:PROF#C1 and #C3 as above. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:46, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
keep Plenty of citations and a position that both seem to meet WP:NPROF. Sandals1 (talk) 15:05, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets the criteria at WP:NPROF.4meter4 (talk) 12:40, 23 September 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.