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. ✗ plicit 00:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC) reply

Mahyar_Tousi (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enough to meet notability guidelines. (E.G. Guardian article is WP:SPS, election results are trivial, some other articles aren't more than a mere mention etc). There isn't enough here to meet the WP:GNG. Braheemie ( talk) 09:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC) reply

• Keep - Enough WP:RS to qualify for WP:GNG Angryskies ( talk) 21:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC) reply
• Keep - subject of article is a high profile political commentator with considerable name recognition. Easily passes WP:N. -- RaviC ( talk) 10:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC) reply
• Delete the sourcing on this is terrible, I don't think there's a single one which passes WP:GNG currently in the article, and I couldn't find any in a cursory WP:BEFORE search. Not impossible he's GNG-notable, but I'd need to see better sources. SportingFlyer T· C 21:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC) reply
• Delete, subject is not noteworthy enough and this article has a long history of being self promotional in nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paragon Deku ( talk • contribs) 04:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC) reply

• Delete - Insufficiently sourced, lacks independence, seems more like a promotional piece than a wiki article. Doesn't seem to meet notability requirements either, small former youtuber (now quit his channel) who clearly does not pass. Does not have widespread name recognition in the UK. For reference, this is not a political attack on MT as I am also a conservative, I just don't think this meets the requirement WP:N. PompeyTheGreat ( talk) 18:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC) reply

• A note to the closer, there is some AfD-related discussion on the AfD talk page. SportingFlyer T· C 19:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC) reply
• Strong Delete Looking over the sources used to "reference" this article, the only one that appears to be published in a mainstream publication (the Guardian) is his op-ed about himself, and is thus WP:PRIMARY. Almost all of these are links to various YouTube videos. The rest make mere passing mentions, and in at least one case, no mention of him at all. This is not sufficient independent and/or reliable sourcing for an article, and it rather blatantly fails our requirement for substantial coverage. If this wouldn't remotely pass WP:AFC, it's not suitable for the main space encyclopedia. No one seems to be talking about this individual outside of a few YouTubers. Symmachus Auxiliarus ( talk) 22:50, 20 May 2021 (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.