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The result was withdrawn by nominator. Withdrawn per WP:HEY and WP:POLITICIAN, with the intention to focus solely on that aspect of his history until proper sourcing can be obtained. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 22:27, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mahmoud Hessabi[edit]

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

I genuinely do not believe the majority of the information in this page. Whether through citogenesis or a really slick advertising campaign, the only information I can find regarding Hessabi is the information disseminated by his son through his "Museum". Nearly every source has the same list of accomplishments, and quite frankly I can't verify a single one. This includes the "father of modern physics" title, which is only verified by his own website and the user-generated "Iran Chamber Society." Some of the sites in Persian make him out to be some sort of Iranian Prometheus, bringing Science to the country.

TL,DR: Non-notable individual being hyped by his son. Fails WP:GNG, WP:V, and (in a way) WP:FRINGE. Primefac (talk) 17:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article makes several factual claims among all the hype that would, if reliably sourced, grant notability. If he was a distinguished professor, as listed under "accomplishments", rather than an assistant professor, as stated in the lead, then he would pass WP:PROF criterion 5, and if he served as education minister and as a senator then he would pass WP:POLITICIAN. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:24, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's my main concern, really; a complete lack of verifiability for the claims made. Until I see good source he has as much chance of passing PROF/POL as passing WP:MUSICBIO for making a platinum-selling record. Primefac (talk) 18:28, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A quick glance at the book sources linked by the searches above confirms that the subject was minister of education, passing WP:POLITICIAN. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not sure. He may have been inthan the Ministry but so far still fails The Golden Rule. Primefac (talk) 18:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources are independent and reliable. We wouldn't dream of deleting an article about someone who had held this position in the UK or the US, so why should we do so for an Iranian minister of education? 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:58, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In that case it sounds like you're saying we should have a one-paragraph stub saying little more than "Mahmoud Hessabi was the Education Minister for Iran." I'm not trying to be cheeky, genuinely wondering what can be included when there are no sources for the rest. Primefac (talk) 20:37, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If we can't find any more reliably sourced content than that then I don't see why couldn't have such a stub. I would add that I don't read Persian, so am unable to check what would presumably be the vast majority of potential sources, and that there seems to be a spelling of the name in the Roman alphabet that's as least as common as the one given here:

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

86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:40, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I note that one of the greatest claims of notability that was present in the article when it was first written in 2002 has been removed since, that the subject was instrumental in the founding of the University of Tehran. See doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0336-z. Also the lead of the article was changed at some time to say that he was an assistant professor, when he was clearly far more than that. It looks to me as if the misinformation has been added here by people opposed to the existence of this article rather than the original creator. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:56, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why I removed that claim is because a) I couldn't find a single source that mentioned it (though clearly you found one), and b) his name is not mentioned a single time on either University of Tehran or History of the University of Tehran. You'd think the founder of a world-renowned university would get a sentence or two in the Wikipedia article. Primefac (talk) 22:16, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, upon re-reading the section about his founding in your linked article, I see that the author cites Wikipedia. It makes me seriously consider the academic rigour that was put into that journal article. Primefac (talk) 22:17, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is a lot of manufactured hype about the subject, but little of substance. For example, being called the "Father of modern physics in Iran." This is a WP:REDFLAG claim. If indeed he were such an important physicist, there would be ample evidence on Google scholar of his significance as a research scientist. But Google scholar shows only a handful of publications, each having garnered fewer than 10 citations. The current references for the "father of modern physics" claims do not seem to be reliable sources. Anyone can create a conference entitled "60 Years of Physics"; anyone at a conference can call anyone else a "father of modern physics". That does not mean that this makes the individual especially notable. A reliable source would indicate what official body made this pronouncement, and what it is based on. If Hessaby indeed founded the University of Tehran, then that would probably make him notable, but there do not seem reliable historical sources that clarify his role (if any) in the foundation of the university. Furthermore, a site search of the University of Tehran reveals no mention of the subject. If he founded the university, there should be some clear, official evidence for it. The claim that he was Minister of Education from 1951-2 does appear to be supported by reliable sources. So if the article is kept, it should be drastically reduced in length, possibly a stub containing only this and other verifiable claims. Sławomir Biały (talk) 12:09, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Provisional delete. There is no pass of WP:Prof. Can notability be found in POLITICIAN or GNG? Xxanthippe (talk) 03:11, 29 November 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, it can obviously be found in WP:POLITICIAN as already discussed above. I really don't understand these "delete" opinions, as I've never before seen an article about a national government minister get deleted in contradiction to that guideline. If necessary this can be cut back to one sentence saying that he was minister of education of a country more populous than France, the United Kingdom or Italy. It seems that editors are hung up on the many claims in the article that are unsourced rather than the one claim that the subject is verifiably notable. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:19, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly won't put words in other people's mouths, but I wouldn't say that the others are "hung up" on the unsourced claims; when 95% of the claims are unsourced, it makes people suspicious about that last 5%. And you cannot deny that the main focus of the article is to present him as a world-renowned scholar and educator (which there is no evidence for). His political career gets barely a sentence. I'd still like to see him mentioned as more than a footnote for proof of his political career, though; the Minister of Education has to do something to merit the title. Primefac (talk) 20:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The unsourced claims are irrelevant to the notability of the subject, and so do not subtract from it. If this article had simply said, with one of the book sources linked above, "Mahmoud Hessabi was minister of education of Iran in 1952" it would never have been nominated for deletion. We can put the article into that state rather than delete it. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:36, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:44, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That might be a good move. His scientific achievements are negligible. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:41, 29 November 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.