Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armin Navabi

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. Tone 20:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Armin Navabi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

his article was recently deleted on fawiki, I did a thorough search and I couldn't find any proof of notability, fails GNG. Mardetanha (talk) 14:38, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Clearly passed notability for having been covered in many national mainstream media outlets in several different countries, including but not limited to the UK, the Netherlands, Canada, the United States, Malaysia, Australia, Germany and Indonesia. The references contained in this article merely contain a fraction of the total available mainstream media coverage of Navabi and AR, not least because the article has scarcely been updated since 2017 (and it already passed notability then, so now even more). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:05, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep As per Nederlandse Leeuw, notability is more than proved. Also, relevance of articles is contained within each edition of Wikipedia, so the deletion on fawiki is irrelevant unless the specific rationale for deletion is adduced (and this may plausibly lie behind), which could then be examined under enwiki policies. Qoan (say it!) 17:02, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Atheism-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Subject is clearly notable. There are strong references included in the page and any news search brings up multiple reliable sources covering several years up to present. I suggest this is WP:SNOW snowballed. Mramoeba (talk) 09:36, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Per RSs establishing notability. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 10:10, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Multiple mentions in RS. Passes notability. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2020 (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.