Deletion of Reza Parchizadeh (3rd nomination)

Comment: Once his own publications are removed, not much is left. If after all this time his very active supporters here cannot come up with any evidence of notability, then there simply is none. Fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG)

Comment: I have examined the article's sources very carefully, and some might be "significant" or "important" enough to possibly serve as sources for '''expansion''' (but not "bed-rocking") of a general, non-BLP, article. To that extent, the deletion / redaction of the scholarship and work effort that has gone into to this article completely engenders my empathy. However, the subject of this BLP does not '''presently''' meet  and . Although I suspect that that is probably a matter of time, WP is not . The language at the #Reliable sources|BLP reliable sources guideline raises the general benchmark of the Wikipedia principle of verifiability in a BLP. I obtained the assistance of a Persian / Farsi speaker, as challenged. None of the sources can be fairly characterized as convincingly meeting . The issue here isn't whether the article is well written, or interesting to some extent, or could be submitted for magazine review, as it clearly meets those benchmarks in my opinion, but rather the technical issue of not having good . The BLP reliable sources guideline reads, "... material about living persons that is unsourced '''''or poorly sourced''''' should be removed immediately and without discussion. This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable, and whether it is in a biography or in some other article. ''Material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism.'' '''When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources'''..."   It is perhaps mildly telling that a line of enquiry discloses no article in any sister Wikipedia, which is slightly (but not irreconcilably) at odds with assertions that the Persian-language community is pressingly familiar with the subject of the BLP. (This in itself is absolutely not a point of elimination, just a minor consideration.)  For thoroughness, another avenue of investigation was a detailed review of the previous AfDs. Within this line of review, I found that a component element in the previous reasoning for article retention was the erroneous conflation of this article's BLP subject with someone who had "notoriety as a former dictator's son", who was mentioned in news reports. I would speculate that this mistake arose from either a good faith mistranslation(s) or mistaken identity. Of course, in fact, Reza Pahlavi is not the same person as Reza Parchizadeh. In summary, there is a  consensus running through all three AfDs, particularly here, with editors recurrently looking for threshold-meeting , and, despite suggestions, none actually has emerged to date
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG||WP:CRYSTAL||WP:BLP||WP:RS||WP:RS)

Comment: per Ukexpat & Randykitty.  In addition, the article is |promotional, per DGG & Ray
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP)

Comment: fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG)

Comment: He seems to meet , however he doesn't seem all that notable to me. Also as stated above it does come off as promotional  that is the only real problem I have with the article. I could be reading into the tone of the article too much. (and please don't  me
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:IMPARTIAL||WP:SOFIXIT)

Comment: Certainly nowhere near rof. There is not enough substance for 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P||WP:GNG)