This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (the page is not complete yet, so why are you so in hurry for deleting it ?) -- AbdallahAly ( talk) 10:45, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Please note this is supposed to be an encyclopedia article, not a resume. Please see
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and
Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not the place to post your résumé.
Please do not re-add the massively overlong "publications and researches" yet again, as this will be considered as vandalism.
Please also remove, or integrate into prose, the lists of "Awards", "Memberships" and "International World Wide Research Programs" Thank you -
Arjayay (
talk)
16:35, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
"On Wikipedia, vandalism is the act of editing the project in a malicious manner that is intentionally disruptive. Vandalism includes the addition, removal, or other modification of the text or other material that is either humorous, nonsensical, a hoax, or that is of an offensive, humiliating, or otherwise degrading nature." [1] , therefore , Arjayay is not being neutral and shows a big misunderstanding of vandalism.
also i could say repeatedly "re-removing" such material, once that has been pointed out, is "intentionally disruptive", which, by your own description, is vandalism ..... , again you are being not neutral, as there are other articles with bigger references, you even want to enforce (and not propose) your own structure for the article ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.6.111 ( talk) 18:33, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
References
Arjayay, as for insisting on Biased removal of data with COI, please check Ahmed_Zewail, Albert Eisntein, and many others, and stop vandalizing the article as a the CV of the professor is way bigger than this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.6.111 ( talk) 21:44, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
please check and compare to Ahmed Zewail, Albert Einstein and many others if requested, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.6.111 ( talk) 20:23, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Although I do not agree with comparisons, I have, as you requested, looked at the Albert Einstein article. This is a "Good" article so it should be a fair example:-
The Einstein article has a "Readable prose size" (click "Page size" in the left hand column) of 9,199 words, supported by 185 references, and has a list of 22 publications.
The Saad article has a "Readable prose size" of 54 words, supported by one reference, and your preferred version has a list of 69 publications.
The Einstein article, therefore, has 418 words for every publication listed, the Saad has 0.782 words for every publication listed, or in other words, Einstein has 534 times as much text for every publication. The Saad article is, therefore, totally unbalanced.
You should also read WP:Notability (academics) as Wikipedia has a very high benchmark for including academics in particular
Similarly, only "major academic awards, such as the Nobel Prize, MacArthur Fellowship, the Fields Medal, the Bancroft Prize, the Pulitzer Prize for History, etc" confer any notability.
Currently, the only reference about Saad himself, rather than his writings etc. is the university website, which is not WP:Independent - you need to find, and include references, to show he has from significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Without such references the article could be nominated for deletion. - Arjayay ( talk) 07:51, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
"The Einstein article, therefore, has 418 words for every publication listed, the Saad has 0.782 words for every publication listed, or in other words, Einstein has 534 times as much text for every publication. The Saad article is, therefore, totally unbalanced". ~Arjayay [1]
So basically contradict yourself , distributing the whole article words over the publications section makes no sense ! then you speak about references and "Notability" ... you keep mangling references with publications. you want to remove the publications section which exists in a lot of biography articles [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] ... ,same goes for awards and other sections, it is a fact !
I am not "distributing the whole article words over the publications section" - I am pointing out that this article is highly imbalanced, with a "readable prose size" of just 54 words, but vast lists - which is why I believe it is a resume/CV not an encyclopedia article - it tells us almost nothing about Aly Saad.
As previously explained, publications do not, "make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are" so you need to add reliable sources to show that Aly Saad meets WP:Notability (academics)
As previously explained, "comparisons with other articles is generally not acceptable"; so your long list of other articles, is irrelevant
I repeat my unanswered question "could you please explain why you are so determined to try and keep these excessive Resume/CV type additions, if you do not have a conflict of interest?"
Thank you - Arjayay ( talk) 14:27, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
References
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (the page is not complete yet, so why are you so in hurry for deleting it ?) -- AbdallahAly ( talk) 10:45, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Please note this is supposed to be an encyclopedia article, not a resume. Please see
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and
Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not the place to post your résumé.
Please do not re-add the massively overlong "publications and researches" yet again, as this will be considered as vandalism.
Please also remove, or integrate into prose, the lists of "Awards", "Memberships" and "International World Wide Research Programs" Thank you -
Arjayay (
talk)
16:35, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
"On Wikipedia, vandalism is the act of editing the project in a malicious manner that is intentionally disruptive. Vandalism includes the addition, removal, or other modification of the text or other material that is either humorous, nonsensical, a hoax, or that is of an offensive, humiliating, or otherwise degrading nature." [1] , therefore , Arjayay is not being neutral and shows a big misunderstanding of vandalism.
also i could say repeatedly "re-removing" such material, once that has been pointed out, is "intentionally disruptive", which, by your own description, is vandalism ..... , again you are being not neutral, as there are other articles with bigger references, you even want to enforce (and not propose) your own structure for the article ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.6.111 ( talk) 18:33, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
References
Arjayay, as for insisting on Biased removal of data with COI, please check Ahmed_Zewail, Albert Eisntein, and many others, and stop vandalizing the article as a the CV of the professor is way bigger than this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.6.111 ( talk) 21:44, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
please check and compare to Ahmed Zewail, Albert Einstein and many others if requested, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.6.111 ( talk) 20:23, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Although I do not agree with comparisons, I have, as you requested, looked at the Albert Einstein article. This is a "Good" article so it should be a fair example:-
The Einstein article has a "Readable prose size" (click "Page size" in the left hand column) of 9,199 words, supported by 185 references, and has a list of 22 publications.
The Saad article has a "Readable prose size" of 54 words, supported by one reference, and your preferred version has a list of 69 publications.
The Einstein article, therefore, has 418 words for every publication listed, the Saad has 0.782 words for every publication listed, or in other words, Einstein has 534 times as much text for every publication. The Saad article is, therefore, totally unbalanced.
You should also read WP:Notability (academics) as Wikipedia has a very high benchmark for including academics in particular
Similarly, only "major academic awards, such as the Nobel Prize, MacArthur Fellowship, the Fields Medal, the Bancroft Prize, the Pulitzer Prize for History, etc" confer any notability.
Currently, the only reference about Saad himself, rather than his writings etc. is the university website, which is not WP:Independent - you need to find, and include references, to show he has from significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Without such references the article could be nominated for deletion. - Arjayay ( talk) 07:51, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
"The Einstein article, therefore, has 418 words for every publication listed, the Saad has 0.782 words for every publication listed, or in other words, Einstein has 534 times as much text for every publication. The Saad article is, therefore, totally unbalanced". ~Arjayay [1]
So basically contradict yourself , distributing the whole article words over the publications section makes no sense ! then you speak about references and "Notability" ... you keep mangling references with publications. you want to remove the publications section which exists in a lot of biography articles [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] ... ,same goes for awards and other sections, it is a fact !
I am not "distributing the whole article words over the publications section" - I am pointing out that this article is highly imbalanced, with a "readable prose size" of just 54 words, but vast lists - which is why I believe it is a resume/CV not an encyclopedia article - it tells us almost nothing about Aly Saad.
As previously explained, publications do not, "make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are" so you need to add reliable sources to show that Aly Saad meets WP:Notability (academics)
As previously explained, "comparisons with other articles is generally not acceptable"; so your long list of other articles, is irrelevant
I repeat my unanswered question "could you please explain why you are so determined to try and keep these excessive Resume/CV type additions, if you do not have a conflict of interest?"
Thank you - Arjayay ( talk) 14:27, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
References