Zakir Hossain Raju (professor): Not meeting the requirements in WP:NACADEMIC as a professor, nor in WP:ENT as a film/documentary maker.  Also, the subject appears to have a WP:COI with the article author .  — MdsShakil ( talk ) 12:06, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Bangladesh .  — MdsShakil ( talk ) 12:07, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I concur with the nom; the subject fails GNG, NPROF, and ENT notability policies.  UtherSRG (talk) 13:20, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions .  UtherSRG (talk) 13:20, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you for your review of the Wikipedia article on Zakir Hossain Raju.  I appreciate your diligence in ensuring that articles meet the relevant Wikipedia guidelines.  I would like to address your concerns: Notability (WP:GNG): Zakir Hossain Raju has made significant contributions to the fields of media and journalism studies, particularly in Bangladesh.  While it's true that he may not have widespread international media coverage, he is recognized in academic circles, and his research papers are highly regarded in his field.  Universities in bangladesh included this research paper as course-guided material (Books, Article, Research Paper).  Academic Notability (WP:NACADEMIC): While it is correct that Professor Raju may not be widely known outside of his field, within the academic community in Bangladesh, he is well-regarded for his contributions to media studies.  The Prestigious Film Festival like Venice Film Festival , International Film Festival Rotterdam invited him as a jury chair in the asain film category.  His books on cinema are widely available in Europe.  Entertainment Notability (WP:ENT): As a documentary maker and filmmaker, Zakir Hossain Raju may not be a household name, but his work has had an impact on the documentary and filmmaking landscape in Bangladesh.  He has contributed to the cultural and artistic representation of his country through his films.  His films were selected for festivals like the Busan Film Festival and others in the 1990s.  So that the news and information about this matter are not on the internet.  Conflict of Interest (WP:COI): As the article author, I can confirm that I am not personally related to Zakir Hossain Raju and have no conflict of interest in creating or editing the article.  My sole intention is to provide accurate and reliable information about a notable individual.  And there is misinformation or delusions on the internet about the name; there is a filmmaker Jakir Hossain Raju with a similar name whose job is filmmaking.  I myself got puzzled by searching the books of him (Zakir Hossain Raju).  This is another reason why I chose this person to create an article about him.  Since 2015, I have liked to contribute in Wikipedia in the area of cinema, I know my contribution to Wikipedia is nothing but a drop of water in this area.  Furthermore, it's worth noting that Wikipedia's notability guidelines allow for the inclusion of articles about individuals who are notable within specific geographic or academic contexts, even if they do not have international fame.  Zakir Hossain Raju's impact in Bangladesh and his contributions to academic research make him a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article.  In summary, I believe that the article on Zakir Hossain Raju meets the relevant Wikipedia guidelines, and I would be happy to work with you to address any specific concerns or make improvements to the article as needed.  Let's make Wikipedia more informative together!  Thank you for your attention to this matter.  Best regards, Parbon CuriousCrafter 16:00, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The article will be kept only when that person meets the notability criteria.  You have to prove which points he passed and also provide reliable sources.  — MdsShakil ( talk ) 18:18, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You uploaded his picture as your own work on Commons, so how can we assure that you have no WP:COI?  — MdsShakil ( talk ) 18:22, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That has all the hallmarks of a ChatGPT authored screed.  Polyamorph ( talk ) 14:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Subject's entry in Bengali Wikipedia, his entry in IMDb as well as his faculty profile in addition to the 13 inline cites appended to his English Wikipedia entry confirm notability.  — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Bangla Wikipedia entry is also on AFD and was created by the same user.  IMDB is not a reliable source, and the faculty profile doesn't seem to have any point; that could be passed WP:NPROF.  The source mentioned in the article doesn't meet WP:SIGCOV about him.  — MdsShakil ( talk ) 18:14, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Roman Spinner , I am baffled that someone with over 50,000 edits and almost two decades of experience could argue that a WP entry (regardless of which language it is in), an IMDb entry, and wikilinks constitute arguments in favor of notability.  WP and IMDb are user-contributed sources, none of this means anything here.  And a faculty profile is not an independent source and soesn't mean anything for notability either... -- Randykitty ( talk ) 08:27, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The presence of a Wikipedia page in another language should never be considered as an argument to keep it in a different language. However, if we were to use that logic, note that the page in Bengali Wikipedia has now been deleted. -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 20:46, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  agreed with @ Roman Spinner 103.113.149.244 ( talk ) 07:01, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 00:14, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG , WP:NPROF .  I am not seeing any significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.  -- আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk ) 18:33, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] news from The Daily Star , Bangladesh Post, Dhaka Tribune, etc. and ISBN/DOI ID, festival website mentions are not independent, reliable sources?  What are the reliable sources, I wonder?  There are a bunch of bengali news, journals, and book publications of/about the subject on the internet; I didn't cite here for the English readability.  CuriousCrafter 14:05, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I opened the refs and it passes BASIC.  Desertarun ( talk ) 18:34, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Add .  5 refs have been added since the start of this afd, so the ref count is now 18.  Desertarun ( talk ) 20:26, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - Count is irrelevant.  Quality is what matters when it comes to notability.  An assertion of notability must include (at least three?) references that each have these qualities: reliability , independence from the subject , and provide significant coverage of the subject .  - UtherSRG (talk) 01:18, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: A source analysis would be helpful.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:08, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I will try.  Ref 1 & 2 = profile, Ref 3 = passing mentions, Ref 4 = review of his one book, Ref 5 = unreliable, Ref 6 = passing mentions, Ref 7 to 13 = written by subject Zakir Hossain Raju himself, Ref 14 & 15 = passing mentions, Ref 16 & 17 = profile, Ref 18, 20, 21 = usual news e.g. Raju hands award to Japanese filmmaker, Ref 19 = ? , Ref 22 = passing mentions.  আফতাবুজ্জামান ( talk ) 17:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Subject has an h-index of 5 and cannot find anything about him which would lend me to believe he meets any of 8 criteria of WP:NACADEMIC .  He would also not meet WP:NFILMMAKER as these do not even appear to be notable films.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 20:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep has a lot of books to his name, potentially satisfies WP:NAUTHOR .  neutral h-index is not a good indicator of anything in the humanities (or indeed any subject, as it is easily manipulated through self citations or publishing in junk journals).  Potentially statisfies  5. and  6. of WP:NACADEMIC (head of department, dean, founding director...of various institutes).  Polyamorph ( talk ) 15:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] edit:changed to 'neutral', not as many books as I first thought, several chapters and research articles.  Does have some coverage in independent reliable sources, not sure if it's enough.  Polyamorph ( talk ) 19:53, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as head of a department, full professor, and journal founder.  I'm hesitant to support based on judging a film festival, which is not a factor and, from my insider knowledge of other film festivals, is often done from friendships and horse-trading, rather than ability to judge anything.  Coverage per SIGCOV is somewhat weak, but he still passes the Prof test.  Bearian ( talk ) 01:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Bearian , I don't see the "journal founder", can you please clarify?  -- Randykitty ( talk ) 09:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete . Being full professor or head of a department is not enough to satisfy WP:ACADEMIC and WP:GNG is not met either. -- Randykitty ( talk ) 09:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I can't see a pass of WP:Prof .  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 02:12, 2 November 2023 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Delete .  He's one of only a handful of academics writing about Bangladeshi cinema.  Unfortunately that hasn't resulted in his work (one book based on his PhD thesis and various chapters and journal articles) being highly cited.  And I agree with আফতাবুজ্জামান's source assessment.  So doesn't meet WP:PROF or WP:GNG .  Worldbruce ( talk ) 09:54, 2 November 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