Project:Requests for deletion/Requests/2018/Jamshed Nasir

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The outcome of this request for deletion was to File:Symbol delete vote.svg Delete. Chenzw  Talk  17:15, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Jamshed Nasir

Jamshed Nasir (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

Eptalon has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Questionable notability; while being a university professor is certainly an achievement, it does not make a person notable. Propose deletion, but not as quick deletion. What do other people think? Eptalon (talk) 11:04, 25 April 2018 (UTC)--Eptalon (talk) 11:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC) Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

• Yes we have a track record on this issue: no-one is notable for just doing a job they are paid to do (well except maybe the absolutely top posts). But if independent reliable sources say they are exceptional, that counts. And awards count so long as they are not publicity campaigns in disguise. The concept of independent evidence is central to notability, which why we frown on social media 'likes' and advertising ploys. Delete. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Most universities vice-chancellors are paid to do the job and they are notable for occupying that position regardless of whether they are paid or not. T Cells (talk) 21:28, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• Most of the sources are not independent and it is natural for principals to have their name mentioned while writing about their institutions. But I don't think that makes them notable. The notability of institutions doesn't prove notability of a person. So delete.-BRP ^ever 12:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Nobody is saying the subject is notable because the institution is notable. We are saying they are notable because they are the head of that institution. T Cells (talk) 21:32, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• Doesn't the subject pass [[1]] per criteria 6? Ma'az (talk) 17:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
•  (change conflict)  Comment. This person may—repeat may–qualify, independent of other arguments, under "Academics (criterion 6)". I suppose the two questions here would be

  (1) Is en:FMH College of Medicine and Dentistry a "major academic institution"? (I don't know the answer to this.)

  (2) Does the requirement of reliable sources apply to the person in general, or only that a reliable source confirms that the person holds the high post? I'd note that on enwiki, at en:WP:NACADEMIC, the guideline explicitly states that it is independent of GNG—and the description of the guideline suggests that RS are only required in this situation to verify that the person in fact holds the post. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

• NPROF is one of the few that overrides GNG because they note that academics are often very notable for an encyclopedia but don't generally get covered by mainstream press etc. Since we use what en has unless we have something, that would apply here as well. -DJSasso (talk) 18:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

• I think the article is within the criteria 6 of academics, that's why I created the article, and I also found some reliable sources about the subject like, DailyTimes [2], Nawai-waqt [3], DailyPakistan [4]. So, I'll keep. Ma'az (talk) 04:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
• No, because it implies that anyone who gets a chair is notable, which is ridiculous. There are humdreds of professors whose best friends would be surprised to find them on wikipedia. There is a huge difference between a chair at Harvard and one at... Our default position is that notability has to be endorsed by independent sources. Let's keep that in mind. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:26, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

People don't have to occupy a named chair at Harvard to be considered notable. A named chair position in a major academic institution is what the policy required. T Cells (talk) 21:36, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• Delete as Macdonald-ross noted, chair or professor is not notable. In addition the university is not major within Pakistan let alone world wide. -- Gotanda (talk) 02:42, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Your claim that FMH College of Medicine and Dentistry is a university is false, at the very least misleading. This is not a university and the website you provided linked to "PAKISTANI UNIVERSITIES BY TOWN". T Cells (talk) 21:04, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• Strong Keep:- en:FMH College of Medicine and Dentistry is a degree awarding and a major academic institution. In most Commonwealth countries including Pakistan and Nigeria institutions ,the principal is the highest-level elected or appointed academic post and this satisfied criterion 6 of our notability guidelines for academics. T Cells (talk) 20:54, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

"Degree awarding" is not relevant. Can you provide any support for the claim that it is a major academic institution? Being a university or college does not in and of itself make it a major academic institution. Otherwise they all are major and the distinction is meaningless, so then criteria 6 becomes meaningless as well. -- Gotanda (talk) 23:19, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, but none of the assertions above make sense to me and please, learn the difference between a college and university. T Cells (talk) 06:57, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

This request is due to close on 11:04, 2 May 2018 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.