Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amir Soleymani

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 merge‎ to Nifty Gateway. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amir Soleymani

Amir Soleymani (edit | 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)

Not notable. Cannot find any reliable non-primary sources about him. Aintabli (talk) 21:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Iran, United Arab Emirates, and United Kingdom. Aintabli (talk) 21:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Nifty Gateway: All of the coverage about him outside of press releases and interviews is about his lawsuit against Nifty Gateway which can be covered in that article. S0091 (talk) 14:54, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Just delete, I think. Merge (see below) I'm not sure if it's due or undue to put reference to this into Nifty Gateway, but I don't really see any reason to merge this content in particular. -- asilvering (talk) 04:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Asilvering the reason I think a merge might be appropriate is because the case itself is significant according to The Telegraph (footnote 5): "In a case with huge repercussions for the UK consumer,...". and "The case is of such significance that the UK’s Competition and Market Authority is backing Mr Soleymani’s legal claim." S0091 (talk) 14:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @S0091 hm ok, I buy that. -- asilvering (talk) 17:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Asilvering thanks for your consideration. Of course had you not been convinced, ok as well. S0091 (talk) 17:59, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Changing my vote to merge as nom per the discussion above. Aintabli (talk) 19:13, 27 February 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.