Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shafkat Chowdhury

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. JohnCD (talk) 12:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shafkat Chowdhury

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

Non-notable engineer whose notability is not established via reliable third party references. The article is a vanity autobiography created by the subject himself using the account Stdsac (talk · contribs). The article was on prod, but the subject objected saying: I want to keep my page in wikipedia as my biography is being published in who's who in America and who's who in the world. I want to tell about my contribution. So, I will appreciate if wikipedia authority does not delete my page.

The subject claims his own notability based solely on listing in Who's Who. However, there is virtually no Google hits for the subject outside of Wikipedia mirrors and social network profiles. It is claimed that the subject had a lead role in a few NASA projects. However, this claim is not backed by any references. The user Stdsac keeps adding links to a scanned NASA call for proposals, however the section he cites has no mention of the subject. Ragib (talk) 16:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per Ragib fails WP:GNG and lacks independent sources.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:44, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 12:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete as per WP:V and therefore WP:N. The subject himself is the creator of this article and he admitted that fact. Thus, a clear case of WP:COI too. -- Niaz ^{(Talk •}^Contribs) 10:48, 13 February 2012 (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.