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. NW (Talk) 15:35, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Karamudini[edit]

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

Grandiose claims in this article on an Iranian academic cannot be verified. I searched by his name in Farsi and still found nothing. Bringing to AfD in case I have overlooked something. Abductive (reasoning) 13:49, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Lots of academics are translators and publish papers; glancing around on this article, I noticed evidence of having research cited in other works, or other accomplishments that meet Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Also, is there a Wikipedia guideline about English-language notability as opposed notability only in a specific other language? I seem to recall one, but I can't find it. --Closeapple (talk) 02:37, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:59, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding non-English notability, I'm not sure. WP:NONENG and WP:WORLDVIEW are relevant but don't seem to explicitly address this. WP:ANYBIO and satisfying regular article requirements would seem to permit it; it seems to me it's analogous to someone who has English-language notability within their field, but not outside it. Шизомби (talk) 04:14, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNKNOWNHERE "some subjects' notability may be limited to a particular country, region, or culture. However, arguments that state that because a subject is unknown or not well known among English readers it should not have an article encourage a systemic bias on Wikipedia. To avoid this systemic bias, Wikipedia should include all notable topics, even if the subject is not notable within the English speaking population or within more populous or Internet-connected nations. Likewise, arguments that state that because a subject is lesser known or even completely unknown outside a given locality does not mean the subject is not notable."

It seems possible he's notable and verifiable, but I don't know. Is there a good way to solicit help from Farsi speakers [Category:User fa]? Шизомби (talk) 04:47, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Searching by Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL is what I did. You'll note the lack of sourcing extends into Farsi. He really should be evaluated as a translator, I am not even sure he holds a professorship. Abductive (reasoning) 04:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. -- John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:20, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't verify much of this biog, and can't see undeniable notability. Even when I find a book, like this isbn.ir record which matches the book on his homepage, he isnt mentioned in the credits, and there is no worldcat record.
He might be able to satisfy these criteria of WP:ACADEMIC:
"The person is or has been an editor-in-chief of a major well-established journal in their subject area.", or
"the person has authored several books that are widely used as textbooks (or as a basis for a course) at multiple institutions of higher education."
But I can't see evidence that these textbooks or Roshd Biological Education are notable. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:57, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheWeakWilled (T * G) 02:31, 19 December 2009 (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.