Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadia Durrani

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 02:05, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

=[[Nadia Durrani]]=

:{{la|Nadia Durrani}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadia Durrani}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{findsources|Nadia Durrani}})

This unsourced BLP fails WP:BIO, especially WP:PROF. The closest claim I can see is that she is an editor of a journal (WP:PROF 8), but she fails on that prong because she is an editor but not the EIC (somebody else is) [http://www.world-archaeology.com/about-us/our-writers.html according to the journal's website]. Arcahaaaeeeoo (talk) 14:28, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Delete. I agree with nominator. No notability apparent. Why was this article not prodded before coming to AfD? Xxanthippe (talk).

:*Comment -- I would have prodded it, but [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Nadia+Durrani the article's history] indicates that it has already been prodded and deleted, so I didn't think it was eligible. -- Arcahaaaeeeoo (talk) 02:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

:::O.K. Thanks. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:59, 20 March 2010 (UTC).

Delete per nom. Gnews searchers beware - there appears to be another person of the same name who has gotten some press coverage. Ray^Talk 22:56, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Delete. Doesn't appear to be a single source here. WoS shows several individuals called N Durrani, but they seem to be medical researchers. Of the 30 hits there for "Durrani N*", none seem to belong to our subject, giving an h-index of 0. No evidence of passing on any of the other criteria in WP:PROF via title, awards, editorships, etc. This seems like a pretty clear-cut case. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 16:13, 23 March 2010 (UTC).

: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.