360:
234:
reviews by reliable sources. I am sure she is pure vandal-bait, and if you watch her interviews it isn't hard to see why! But notable, definitely. I will do my best to add some the RS info to the actual article, but unsure if I can pull it off this week. May have to take your advice and sic the ARS on this one!
304:
the person in question, it is not a significant award, it has quite a low level of selectivity compared to what is required to be published by an academic press or major popular press, and it does not enhance
Knowledge's ability to write a biography of the person, which is what the primary notability
233:
She is a regular on Fox News (Cavuto, O'Reilly, Geraldo), a published author, and an activist who has worked with people like Robert Gates and Nancy Pelosi. Her own website links to several YouTube videos of her TV appearances (several other links are broken), and the website for her book shows many
194:
that the ARS comes by and finds a couple of good references that provide some in-depth discussion. I looked, for some time, for sources to verify the information in the article and all I could find was an interview that she did with Glenn Beck, which goes a little way toward notability. But appearing
646:
Dream Focus, I never said that being a vandalism magnet is an argument for deletion, but thank you for the advice. As for that transcript, if you had looked at the article, you would have seen that I was the one who added the sentence "...she has appeared on Glenn Beck's TV show (in 2007, on CNN)."
524:
There are also many many many cable news clips of her punditry on Iran-related topics, where she is not the direct subject... but I think that being a regular TV pundit is a little different then being quoted in the newspaper once, don't you? Search her name on YouTube and you will see that she is
248:
Appearing on TV does not necessarily contribute to notability. Like any other form of coverage, it depends on the depth and the topic of the coverage. If a TV producer decided to do a segment about her book, then that argues for the notability of her work (and by extension, the author herself). But
197:
This article is a vandalism magnet (look at the article history) and no doubt this AfD has the potential for stirring up turmoil. I figured that the subject would be easily notable and was surprised that I wasn't able to do and find much--perhaps I was right and this will be deleted; perhaps I was
541:
Tarastar, I'm going to have another look at the articles from that
Infomart database: at least one of them looks decent. I don't accept Universal Peace TV or that Institute for Monitoring Peace as reliable sources that impart notability, but other editors may differ (esp. on the second one). That
299:
A television programme giving someone a seat on a panel or an interview to air their views is no different than a newspaper letting someone put a guest column on the editorial page. In terms of actual informational content conveyed, it's probably less. They say whatever they want without being
195:
on one (or a couple) of TV shows is not enough, in my opinion. If you look hard you'll find an article from a Lodi paper which mentions here, but when I looked at that the relevant sections were (oddly) blanked out. Besides that, I've seen only blogs and a few mentions in the
National Review.
721:
647:
to the article, with a footnote to that very article. The claim that someone is notable because they're interviewed on TV is clearly not supported by consensus on
Knowledge, and "major news channel calling for her expert opinion": you know this was an appearance on Glenn Beck's show, right?
393:
I think what you saw were unacceptable edits that have been applied to the article before; they contain commentary and personal observation, as well as factual inaccuracies (themselves remainders of previous vandalism--that she was born in Boston, France, for instance). I have removed that
249:
if she's just invited to give her views in a programme about another topic (e.g. "What do you think of
Ahmadinejad's visit to the UN, what do you think about human rights in Iran, etc."), it's really no different than getting quoted in a newspaper article --- it's not coverage
483:
This search brings up a few articles in newspapers like
Vancouver Sun and the Ottowa Citizen... we would have to cough up $ 5 to read the actual articles (although she published the article text on her own website, I am assuming you guys don't want to take her word for
487:
584:
To the nominator, I'd like to point out that being a "vandalism magnet" is not a reason to delete something. From her television appearances alone, she is clearly notable, a major news channel calling upon her for her expert opinion.
160:
662:
525:
brought out as an "Iranian scholar, activist, and author" on a very regular basis. I actually disagree with most of what she says... but she really is known by the media for constantly saying it!
664:
If ever there is a story that could use commentary by someone
Iranian, female, and slightly crazy, she is the cable news go-to-girl... and there are a surprising number of stories like that!
492:
I know I need to actually go through these and pick out factual information to improve the article, but do any of these convince anyone that she she shouldn't just be deleted?
661:
If it were just Beck, I would agree with you, but the point is she is interviewed on every major cable news network on a fairly regular basis. Check this list of news clips:
615:
Click the Google news search at the top of the AFD, and you'll find her mentioned in many sources. There is a transcript showing her being interviewed about her book on CNN
115:
689:
154:
432:
336:
519:
120:
563:
473:- I really don't know what kind of editorial integrity this source has (any advice?), but it is an interesting interview with her.
88:
83:
17:
92:
175:
142:
75:
367:
346:
314:
262:
481:
521:
Interview with Sean
Hannity, the clip is glitchy, but Hannity is questioning her mainly about her own experiences.
752:
36:
751:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
542:
book quote is helpful, as is the AP story: those things may change my mind, and I'll get back to it. Thanks,
136:
363:
342:
310:
258:
733:
132:
53:
737:
699:
673:
656:
641:
608:
575:
551:
534:
501:
462:
447:
422:
403:
388:
371:
350:
318:
294:
266:
243:
225:
207:
57:
669:
571:
530:
497:
271:
The news media sees her as an expert on that, then that does count towards her
Knowledge notability.
239:
489:
She is discussed twice in the book "iMuslims: Rewiring the House of Islam", published by UNC Press.
221:
182:
168:
514:
418:
476:
359:
there's some
Persian language hits as well, but mostly blogs and other user-generated content:
696:
443:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
729:
652:
619:
586:
547:
465:
399:
384:
272:
203:
79:
49:
708:- I've improved the article and added several references. There are artciles about her in
665:
567:
526:
493:
235:
618:. Just search for her name there, to get to the part where they start interviewing her.
148:
616:
464:- AP Story: she is not the main topic (and she doesn't actually have to be, accordng to
716:(8-2-2005) that Tarastar42 mentioned above. There is also a third article about her in
217:
414:
306:
362:. I see some newspapers in there but I haven't really had time to dig through them.
724:
and entering her name in the search form. I believe this meets the requirements of
439:
109:
725:
648:
543:
395:
380:
300:
required to cite sources or undergo editorial fact-checking. It is not coverage
199:
71:
63:
478:
Here is a transcript of testimony she gave to the British House of Commons
471:
457:
Here is a list of links I found, let me know what you guys think:
745:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
468:), but featured very prominently, not a trivial mention at all.
516:
Fox News interviews her about her book and her experiences.
253:
her and doesn't contribute to Knowledge writing an article
190:
Here goes: non-notable for lack of reliable sources. It is
216:
Expand and improve the article rather than deleting it.
105:
101:
97:
167:
379:in some parts unencyclopedic and needs re-writing.
720:(10-19-2006), which can be confirmed by going to
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
755:). No further edits should be made to this page.
690:list of Literature-related deletion discussions
181:
8:
433:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
684:
427:
331:
394:'information' again and warned the user.
337:list of Iran-related deletion discussions
688:: This debate has been included in the
431:: This debate has been included in the
335:: This debate has been included in the
198:wrong, and I will be gladly proven so.
7:
562:This article has been nominated for
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
58:02:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
738:14:09, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
700:15:39, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
674:06:57, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
657:12:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
642:11:21, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
609:11:19, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
576:04:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
552:12:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
535:05:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
502:03:12, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
448:19:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
423:17:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
404:22:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
389:14:13, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
372:08:36, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
351:08:36, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
319:11:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
295:11:19, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
267:08:36, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
244:07:59, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
226:04:55, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
208:03:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
772:
413:Lack of reliable sources.
748:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
507:Yet Another Comment
714:The Ottawa Citizen
44:The result was
710:The Vancouver Sun
702:
693:
578:
450:
436:
353:
340:
192:entirely possible
763:
750:
694:
638:
635:
632:
629:
626:
623:
605:
602:
599:
596:
593:
590:
558:
437:
341:
291:
288:
285:
282:
279:
276:
186:
185:
171:
123:
113:
95:
34:
771:
770:
766:
765:
764:
762:
761:
760:
759:
753:deletion review
746:
722:NewsLibrary.com
712:(8-6-2005) and
636:
633:
630:
627:
624:
621:
603:
600:
597:
594:
591:
588:
309:are all about.
289:
286:
283:
280:
277:
274:
128:
119:
86:
70:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
769:
767:
758:
757:
741:
740:
703:
681:
680:
679:
678:
677:
676:
612:
611:
579:
556:
555:
554:
523:
522:
517:
511:
510:
491:
490:
485:
479:
474:
469:
459:
458:
452:
425:
408:
407:
406:
374:
354:
328:
327:
326:
325:
324:
323:
322:
321:
305:criterion and
228:
189:
188:
125:
121:AfD statistics
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
768:
756:
754:
749:
743:
742:
739:
735:
731:
727:
723:
719:
715:
711:
707:
704:
701:
698:
691:
687:
683:
682:
675:
671:
667:
663:
660:
659:
658:
654:
650:
645:
644:
643:
640:
639:
617:
614:
613:
610:
607:
606:
583:
580:
577:
573:
569:
565:
561:
557:
553:
549:
545:
540:
539:
538:
537:
536:
532:
528:
520:
518:
515:
513:
512:
508:
505:
504:
503:
499:
495:
488:
486:
482:
480:
477:
475:
472:
470:
467:
463:
461:
460:
456:
453:
449:
445:
441:
434:
430:
426:
424:
420:
416:
412:
409:
405:
401:
397:
392:
391:
390:
386:
382:
378:
375:
373:
369:
365:
361:
358:
355:
352:
348:
344:
338:
334:
330:
329:
320:
316:
312:
308:
303:
298:
297:
296:
293:
292:
270:
269:
268:
264:
260:
256:
252:
247:
246:
245:
241:
237:
232:
229:
227:
223:
219:
215:
212:
211:
210:
209:
205:
201:
193:
184:
180:
177:
174:
170:
166:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
138:
134:
131:
130:Find sources:
126:
122:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
747:
744:
717:
713:
709:
705:
685:
620:
587:
581:
559:
506:
454:
428:
410:
376:
356:
332:
301:
273:
254:
250:
230:
213:
196:
191:
178:
172:
164:
157:
151:
145:
139:
129:
45:
43:
31:
28:
730:Hydroxonium
509:A few more:
381:Spada II ♪♫
231:Strong Keep
155:free images
72:Ghazal Omid
64:Ghazal Omid
50:Ron Ritzman
718:The Beacon
666:Tarastar42
568:Tarastar42
527:Tarastar42
494:Tarastar42
236:Tarastar42
466:WP:SIGCOV
440:• Gene93k
218:Cullen328
415:Farhikht
377:Comment:
116:View log
455:Comment
357:Comment
161:WP refs
149:scholar
89:protect
84:history
728:. -
649:Drmies
564:rescue
544:Drmies
411:Delete
396:Drmies
307:WP:BIO
200:Drmies
133:Google
93:delete
697:pablo
637:Focus
604:Focus
560:Note:
302:about
290:Focus
257:her.
255:about
251:about
176:JSTOR
137:books
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
734:talk
726:WP:N
706:Keep
695:--
686:Note
670:talk
653:talk
582:Keep
572:talk
548:talk
531:talk
498:talk
484:it?)
444:talk
429:Note
419:talk
400:talk
385:talk
368:call
347:call
333:Note
315:call
263:call
240:talk
222:talk
214:Keep
204:talk
169:FENS
143:news
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
54:talk
46:keep
438:--
364:cab
343:cab
311:cab
259:cab
183:TWL
118:•
114:– (
736:)
692:.
672:)
655:)
574:)
566:.
550:)
533:)
500:)
446:)
435:.
421:)
402:)
387:)
370:)
349:)
339:.
317:)
265:)
242:)
224:)
206:)
163:)
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
56:)
48:.
732:(
668:(
651:(
634:m
631:a
628:e
625:r
622:D
601:m
598:a
595:e
592:r
589:D
570:(
546:(
529:(
496:(
451:l
442:(
417:(
398:(
383:(
366:(
345:(
313:(
287:m
284:a
281:e
278:r
275:D
261:(
238:(
220:(
202:(
187:)
179:·
173:·
165:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
140:·
135:(
127:(
124:)
112:)
74:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.