Seyed Abbas Mousavi Motlagh: Iskandar323 ( talk ) 12:45, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Politicians ,  and Iran .  Iskandar323 ( talk ) 12:45, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Islam .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:50, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] * Keep passes N:POL as an appointed member of a key constitutional body in Iran.  Being appointed rather than elected doesn’t matter.  Mccapra ( talk ) 20:50, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Mccapra : Hey - what's he a member of?  Genuinely asking.  Is this the Guardian Council part?  - I checked that page and he's not mentioned there as a member past or present.  (And there's obviously no in-line citation for any of this.)  Iskandar323 ( talk ) 04:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Apologies you’re quite right and I misread the article.  He’s not a member of the GC so is not an NPOL pass at all.  He just seems to be some kind of commentator.  He may pass GNG but I’d need to look at the sources more closely.  Mccapra ( talk ) 06:02, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment fa.wiki has a draft article on the subject here but it looks like an abandoned draft from 2020.  He seems to have authored a number of books, but trying to determine whether he passes WP:AUTHOR in Farsi is beyond me. I hesitate to vote delete but tbh I don’t see anything screaming notability to me.  Mccapra ( talk ) 06:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] oh and he’s got 99 followers on Twitter.  Mccapra ( talk ) 06:15, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Not a ringing endorsement.  I might even have that much on my long dormant account.  Iskandar323 ( talk ) 08:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The Farsi news sources seem fairly trivial.  It looks like he's authored books for sure, but without evidence of some serious reviews, I can't see how we can qualify WP:AUTHOR.  If even the Farsi draft was abandoned, that's a bit telling.  Iskandar323 ( talk ) 08:40, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete unless anyone is able show why there is sufficient sourcing that I’ve overlooked.  Mccapra ( talk ) 10:52, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Article is ineligible for soft deletion due to a previously contested PROD.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Aoidh ( talk ) 07:24, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete BLP, fails GNG and BIO.  Sources in article are all primary, nothing that meets IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  BEFORE showed nothing.  WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"' ; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP ) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS , WP:RS , WP:SIGCOV ).  // Timothy :: talk 05:01, 27 April 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete