Deletion of Shoaib Zaidi

Comment: As {{u|Randykitty}} details, we don't really have evidence for passing any of the  criteria. #C1 is closest, as he has three papers with 100+ citations each, but being in the middle position of 20 non-alphabetical authors (as e.g. the top-cited one) implies that his contribution to the work was likely minor
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF)

Comment: Dean of a department does not count as "highest level elected or appointed position at a major academic institution" as required by . Other than the  interview included in the article, I didn't find a lot of coverage for this individual. {{ping|Shirt58}} I have to note that
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMIC||WP:PS)

Comment: Like WikiDan61, I'd like to see a stronger statement from the nom. Having declined a speedy does not make one involved and INVOLVED does not apply to participation in an AFD anyway. Now to the real issue at hand. Above, some arguments in favor of notability are made, under  and under . I don't think either one is correct. It is argued that the subject meets ACADEMIC #6, but as clarified by WikiDan61, dean is not a "highest level elected or appointed position at a major academic institution". The GScholar profile is not an in-depth discussion of the subject and therefore does not contribute to notability under GNG. It could conceivably lead to meeting ACADEMIC #1 by showing that the subject is a highly-cited (and hence highly influential) researcher. However, I don't think this is the case. The profile list three highly-cited articles, but on these papers Zaidi is only a very minor author among a large number. Even counting those papers, his total number of citations is 750 with an h-index of 9. This is far below what we usually take as indicating notability in AfD discussions. Finally, there is the article in ''Dawn''. It is not really ''about'' Zaidi, but about the education program of his university. Even if we accept this as an in-depth source ''about'' Zaidi, we only have one, so I don't think that this meets GNG either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ACADEMIC||WP:GNG)

Comment: Per Randykitty and David Eppstein subject fails   specifically does not meet #C1 does not have highly cited academic work  and his citation are low for that  and fails  lacks indepth sources except one
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:PROF||WP:GNG)

Comment: Only claim of notability is being a dean, which isn't enough to pass . Patents mean very little too, so he fails  as well
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PROF||WP:GNG)