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 no consensus. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:00, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neda Soltani

[edit]

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

Not notable independently of Death of Neda Agha-Soltan, per WP:1E. eh bien mon prince (talk) 11:32, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 12:19, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The circulation of Soltani's photo, and how it affected her life, has received some pretty solid coverage (including the BBC and The Guardian) which is very much independent of the death of her near-namesake, and has made its way into some serious academic discussions (see doi:10.1353/bio.2011.0004 and this book). I think the mistake, as well as the subsequent coverage of her life, is sufficiently notable that the article can be kept. If not, a section in the article on the death would certainly be appropriate. J Milburn (talk) 16:37, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The claim to notability is basically a case of mistaken identity. Agricola44 (talk) 15:06, 9 September 2014 (UTC).[reply]
- So what? There are lots of cases of mistaken identity which are highly significant and worthy of encyclopedic coverage. The question is whether this is one of them. J Milburn (talk) 16:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, it's textbook WP:BLP1E having no WP:LASTING significance. Agricola44 (talk) 19:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Keep as per J Milburn. Numerous references here. The reason the issue is encyclopedic is the whole evolving power of the Internet, as well as Facebook as a protest medium versus governments, meaning this story, even if dependent on a mistaken identity, will be increasingly important.--Tomwsulcer (talk)`

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 03:34, 23 September 2014 (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.