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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:26, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sajjad Khaksari[edit]

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

Nothing at all to insinuate the needed convincing independent notability and the contents are not actually pertaining to this, the best there is, about his controversies and that's certainly not convincing; searches have found nothing better. SwisterTwister talk 05:57, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:09, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:09, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 14:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist — Music1201 ^talk 03:03, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 03:03, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete At this time, this fails WP:GNG and the entire article is a violation of WP:NOTADVOCATE. For any activist, there will usually be significant coverage - at least in other countries if not the home country. I do not see any independent coverage - rather all the references cited are either written by the subject or are self published/unreliable. There is hardly anything online either. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:15, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is obviously violation of notability criteria. It looks like the whole family have made Wikipedia pages for themselves! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niarad (talk • contribs) 08:47, 5 August 2016 (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.