- 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. If any non-sockpuppet would like this article userfied, please let me know or ask at WP:REFUND. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:53, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Heydar Latifiyan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There is no evidence that the article meets WP:GNG. The sources are not verifiable. Furthermore, the article is created in several languages over a short period of time possibly using machine translation. Pirehelo (talk) 19:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:16, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete
or userfy to one of the three blocked sockpuppets that created it. Struck following comment below from User:Liz 05:04, 10 October 2023 (UTC). I was able to check source #6, The Cambridge History of Iran, which is available in English original as well as Farsi translation. The two sentences cited to it, in the "Childhood" section, refer to page 186 in chapter 5 by Keddie and Amanat. This page does indeed verify that Iran suffered a famine in 1870–71, and that Mizra Hussein Khan was a person who existed (there's rather a lot about his prime ministry, actually). Nowhere is Latifayan mentioned, nor his family, nor Vahan Abad.[reply]Not being able to read Farsi, I can't verify that all of the rest of the sources are like this, but the wording and placement of the citations imply it. "Heydar tried to support [actually notable person who did something that can be cited]", "Heydar, along with the rest of the democrats [did a thing, not even cited]", "Heydar Latifian, together with a group of people...", "Heydar Latifiyan was also killed like the rest of his comrades", According to local tradition Heydar's was the only identifiable corpse.The whole thing reads like an article tailored around the life and death of a subject it hardly discusses. General statements are carefully sourced in a way that can be verified (including the distance to the airport!), but none of the sources may mention the subject, who appears to have played an extremely minor role, and meets no notability threshold. However, I can't prove any of this. Given that the subject's great-grandson's article was created by the same set of blocked socks, theories suggest themselves. Folly Mox (talk) 08:55, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Taking another look at the article, I am convinced by Folly Mox's assessment, weak delete or userfy. —siroχo 09:27, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Isn't userfying an article to the User space of a blocked sockpuppet just a way of putting it into cold storage, never to be seen again? Liz Read! Talk! 04:41, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, basically. I think I made a few mistakes with that. I was a little concerned that the Farsi sources might be genuine, but by the time I finished typing I had talked myself out of it and neglected to edit the bolded verbs accordingly. I'll strike for easier processing. Folly Mox (talk) 04:59, 10 October 2023 (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.