Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gomaa
for failing , and .  While I am flattered people conceded my research, I thought I had made it clear that verification and documentation was still required.  I delayed my nom in hopes someone more versed in these things could produce verification.  Oh well.  The fact Gomaa "seems" notable enough ignores these points very severely.  The Cagle website, while very suggestive, does not definitely establish he is actually published internationally, rather than just being pushed around editors' desks.  No one has shown he's been published in either the L.A. or N.Y. Times, despite the hints and implications.  This is supposed to be a scholarly work, not gossip, and if the documentation isn't there, I can't support a keep nom
— NONE, 15:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:V||WP:NOR (Wikipedia:Verifiability)