From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Rahmatollah Ghadimi Chermahini

Rahmatollah Ghadimi Chermahini (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't see what makes him notable. Tehonk ( talk) 01:58, 17 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 05:28, 24 February 2024 (UTC) reply

*Keep - notable for his ongoing multi-national career and for his work on the Shuttle mishap investigation. ( — 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 01:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete no evidence of notability. The article has nothing about the Shuttle mishap, so I do not understand that rationale. (If there is something then please edit the article.) Ldm1954 ( talk) 04:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:37, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply

For the record, I'm not convinced by the keep vote as well. I would like to see some sources meeting WP:SIRS. Tehonk ( talk) 03:46, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The Shuttle assertion is in the article infobox. I too would like to see the article better sourced. Chermahini was certainly affiliated with the Aeronautical Research Inst. of Sweden and Old Dominion University. Agree: the claims he was a NASA engineer and that his expertise on fatigue crack propagation led to involvement in the Shuttle mishap investigation are not reliably sourced. Consider me neutral. ( — 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 04:45, 4 March 2024 (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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Rahmatollah Ghadimi Chermahini

Rahmatollah Ghadimi Chermahini (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't see what makes him notable. Tehonk ( talk) 01:58, 17 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 05:28, 24 February 2024 (UTC) reply

*Keep - notable for his ongoing multi-national career and for his work on the Shuttle mishap investigation. ( — 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 01:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete no evidence of notability. The article has nothing about the Shuttle mishap, so I do not understand that rationale. (If there is something then please edit the article.) Ldm1954 ( talk) 04:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:37, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply

For the record, I'm not convinced by the keep vote as well. I would like to see some sources meeting WP:SIRS. Tehonk ( talk) 03:46, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The Shuttle assertion is in the article infobox. I too would like to see the article better sourced. Chermahini was certainly affiliated with the Aeronautical Research Inst. of Sweden and Old Dominion University. Agree: the claims he was a NASA engineer and that his expertise on fatigue crack propagation led to involvement in the Shuttle mishap investigation are not reliably sourced. Consider me neutral. ( — 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 04:45, 4 March 2024 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook