Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadia Shahram

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Nadia Shahram}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Nadia Shahram}})

Fails WP:BIO, WP:AUTHOR

No significant independent coverage of subject or CAMW organization she is associated with. Found one write-up in a small alumni magazine from 2005 (http://media.wix.com/ugd/ba8d3a_69ce4f04eab549e8992314f78621c089.pdf). There are a few sentences in larger papers like Fox from 2011 (https://www.foxnews.com/us/jury-convicts-new-york-tv-executive-of-beheading-wife) but doubt it rises to level of notability since they are not specifically about subject. No significant coverage located for book or minor awards. InsomniaOpossum (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 January 19. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Women, Law, Islam, Iran, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
• I did a quick check on newspapers.com and there appear to be several articles where the subject has WP:SIGCOV. These include Buffalo News stories in the article that are deadlinks but are available in archive. I’ll need a day or two to do a more thorough look. Note this article passed AFC. Nnev66 (talk) 04:26, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
• Keep as there are at least three references with significant coverage in reliable sources (see below). These are all published in the Buffalo, New York area but that doesn't dissuade me from notability as the coverage is reliable and significant. It was difficult to evaluate this one because a number of the references were primary written by the subject and this wasn't indicated in the referencing (I fixed that). Again note that this article passed WP:AFC before it was published to the mainspace, a process which from my experience is a vigorous check of an article. Nnev66 (talk) 18:51, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

:

1. {{cite news |url=https://www.newspapers.com/image/878249028/?match=1&terms=%22Nadia%20N.%20Shahram%22 |title=Iranian professor airs concern, criticism for land of birth |first=Stephen |last=Watson |date=June 21, 2004 |work=The Buffalo News |via=newspapers.com }}
2. {{cite magazine |title=One Voice - Nadia Shahram fights for equality |url=http://media.wix.com/ugd/ba8d3a_69ce4f04eab549e8992314f78621c089.pdf |first=Grace A. |last=Lazzara |date=Winter 2005 |magazine=Hilbert Connections Magazine |publisher=Hilbert College |pages=6-10 }}
3. {{Cite news |last=Vogel |first=Charity |date=April 25, 2010 |title=Women in the shadows Attorney Nadia Shahram's novel tells the true stories of Iranian women exploited by 'temporary marriage' |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-buffalo-news/163459497/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160308234512/http://www.buffalonews.com/Women_in_the_shadows_Attorney_Nadia_Shahramaposs_novel_tells_the_true_stories_of_Iranian_women_exploited_by_apostemporary_marriageapos.html |archive-date=2016-03-08 |work=The Buffalo News }}

:*Comment: Thank you for adding non-primary sources to the article and the overall improvements you have made to it. I don't think I can access source [1] but based on the title it sounds like potential sigcov. And [3] definitely is. However I am uncertain if [2] qualifies as an independent source, since the subject was an adjunct professor at Hilbert College from 2001-2007 and the magazine featuring her was published in 2005. InsomniaOpossum (talk) 22:32, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:06, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

• Comments - another day, another article up for deleting that I have a potential conflict of interest, for which I must disclose. The subject and I have both volunteered for not one, but two organizations: NYSBA and the Women's Bar Association, the latter from which we have received awards. We also have a public LinkedIn connection in common, one of my (former) best friends from high school. For those reasons, I'm not !voting one way or another, other than to say that she's very accomplished. Bearian (talk) 17:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
• Comment: Fair enough regarding InsomniaOpossum's comment that the Hilbert College source is non-independent since she worked there. I found another review of her book in [https://www.proquest.com/docview/1800511993/51E468DDFFAE4D08PQ/2?&sourcetype=Trade%20Journals Publisher's Weekly (link via Proquest)]. I also added an Attorney of the Year recognition she received in 2018. Nnev66 (talk) 19:33, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

:Delete - It should be deleted because it doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Despite a few references, most of the coverage is either too minor or doesn't offer significant independent insights into Nadia Shahram's career. The sources listed, such as a 2005 alumni magazine and brief mentions in larger outlets like Fox News, are not enough to establish her as a notable figure. Even with some recent improvements and additional sources, the overall coverage is still limited and mostly self-promotional or not directly about her work, which doesn't rise to the level required for inclusion on Wikipedia. Taha Danesh (talk) 21:23, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Weak delete. This is a tough one. There are a lot of passing mentions, but ultimately I don't see enough secondary coverage for GNG, and I don't see enough of her opinions being cited to meet the spirit of NACADEMIC, and her novel has no independent coverage that I can see at all, so there isn't enough to meet NAUTHOR. Taken together there is enough marginal evidence of notability to put me on the fence, but the promotional intent and NOTCV violations push me toward "delete". Ultimately I don't see much that separates her from the average professor of law. Vanamonde93 (talk) 23:44, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment It looks like she also had a restaurant - Nadia's Bistro, in the Olympic Tower, Buffalo, in 1990 [https://www.newspapers.com/image/877028764/?match=1&clipping_id=164828439]. RebeccaGreen (talk) 16:14, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep - It makes the noticeable grade for BLP, with sufficient coverage of indepensdent sources for retention. BTSfangir1 (talk) 10:42, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.