Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Tahir Abbas (2nd nomination) - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Arbitrarily0 (talk | contribs) at 17:36, 1 January 2010 (fixed formatting). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:36, 1 January 2010 by Arbitrarily0 (talk | contribs) (fixed formatting)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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 per WP:SNOW. Subject is clearly notable despite not wanting to be. Handschuh- 09:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

AfDs for this article:

Tahir Abbas

Tahir Abbas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject has requested deletion ((Ticket 2009120310029961 -OTRS volunteers only)).

This was previously a no-consensus in 2007 before we had a clear BLP policy Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Tahir_Abbas.

This appears to be a straightforward case of a marginally notable individual who has requested deletion with a dash of BLP1E for the plagiarism allegations that are sourced to a single publication and therefore not widely considered significant. Spartaz 17:53, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Strong keep, he easily passes WP:PROF and is a willing public figure with a long history of media engagement, as is apparent in the article. It is also incorrect to say that there is only one source for the plagiarism -- there is another reference to the retraction of the article in question. Abbas himself has an extensive history of editing the article and is now requesting deletion only when it has become clear that he can't control it -- deletion would thus be a violation of WP:NPOV and WP:OWN. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 18:03, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Just to add a bit: a search for Abbas in the Guardian alone (here) produces 150 results. This is quite some distance from "marginal notability". Nomoskedasticity (talk) 19:05, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
They can request -- see WP:DEL, 3.4 -- but the real problems emerge with mischief over "marginal notability". Incidentally, I'm not aware that that phrase is used in any deletion-related policy; instead, the relevant term is "non-public figure". In this instance there's no real problem -- Abbas can hardly claim not to be a public figure, in fact he has made every effort to achieve a high profile, particularly through media engagement. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 21:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm for keeping it. The information contained in it is a matter of fact not of opinion. That it no longer promotes his interest (see edit history) is neither here not there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.80.76 (talk) 20:52, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep. I am usually in favour of requests to delete a person's own BLP but not in this case for the reasons clearly articulated above. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:08, 25 December 2009 (UTC).
  • Keep. BLP concerns may be sufficient for article deletion in marginal notability cases, but this one is not a marginal notability case, both for WP:BIO and WP:PROF. Being an elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts is a high honor and is already a significant claim to notability. We also have a large number of news-articles quoting him as a significant expert as well as news-articles specifically about him, such as this one, for example. His own website provides a long list of editorials and opinion pieces that he wrote and of his media appearances. To quote from his website Dr Tahir Abbas FRSA is an internationally-renowned social scientist, and one of the UK's foremost experts on Muslim minority issues, research and policy analysis. In this case that assessment appears to be correct. Nsk92 (talk) 22:27, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep. He appears to pass WP:AUTH, WP:PROF, and WP:GNG, and not marginally. The plagiarism section is adequately sourced, highly relevant, and not presented out of proportion to the rest of the article; therefore there is no BLP issue. If that were the only thing to say about the subject, then it could be considered under BIO1E, but as the article and the commenters above make clear, it's not the only thing. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:02, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep - We don't delete articles just because the subject doesn't like them.— Dædαlus 01:06, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
I would like to note that, from the history of the article, it seems sir Abbas only wants this article deleted as it reveals that he has plagiarized several pieces of work. Sorry, we here at Misplaced Pages do not write articles with a slant. If such information is covered in reliable sources, we publish it. My note about slants has nothing to do with wikipedia being liberal, so I don't want to have any arguments with any who think otherwise. You can post a reply trying to argue with me, but I'll ignore it, so you're better off not wasting your time.— Dædαlus 01:11, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep, I was almost tempted to WP:NAC but WP:BLP can be a touchy subject. This person is a multi-published author, and actually seems to be involved in a controversy reported upon by the media for many of views. Mkdw 22:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep It is obvious that the subject is notable, and the section on plagiarism does not appear to violate WP:BLP or WP:UNDUE. Academic38 (talk) 01:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment The subject of this article was blocked indefinitely for disruptive editing (at this article, with a range of IPs). He has requested unblock to participate here. I have declined, but suggested that he post a statement on his talk page, which I or someone else can copy here. No opinion on deletion, except that I can find no sources that contradict the facts of the article. UltraExactZZ ~ Did 13:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment Tahir Abbas is citing himself as principal author of a work I was principal author of in 1997. Can I suggest he check his exeter email, and colleagues, who I have contacted and change or remove the citation on HIS website that I have already asked for regarding the Runnymede Trust. I am Alex Hall. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.89.195 (talk) 20:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
This isn't the best place to make such requests. Smartse (talk) 21:18, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep, for people with marginal notability who want their bios deleted, I'm usually sympathetic. However, Abbas is by no means marginal, as shown above. Also, I find the timing of this request - just when there is negative information to be reported, a bit sus. I might have been a bit more receptive if he'd requested it before he was outed as a plagiarist. Lankiveil 06:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC).
  • Keep, and noticing some frozen water particles starting to appear. Stifle (talk) 09:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
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.