This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Sorry, not enough in-depth coverage to show that he passes WP:GNG, the NASA is impressive, but does not meet notability criteria on its own, and his scholar profile does not mee WP:NSCHOLAR. Please remember that WP:ANYBIO is a guideline which may denote notability, and does not trump WP:GNG. Onel5969TT me 11:39, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Please read my above reply. Onel5969TT me 11:53, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Onel5969WP:GNG A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
Are we going in a loop here! The article is well referenced.
Sultan easily passes the GNG criteria. It's not very polite to tag pages in the way that you did, you could easily have started a section on the Talk page FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:00, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
There is no in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources. Rather than waste time like this on the talk page, simply find that in-depth coverage if he's notable. Onel5969TT me 12:04, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Onel5969 So NASA now is not a reliable source! good to know!
As this is your 2nd time trying to delete something I have built please stop deleting pages that you have no relation to. This ruins the hard work of others on this website. #Racial bias on Wikipedia. -- FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Onel5969 Now you are moving from notability to reliable sources! amazing! -FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:33, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Well, when you add Facebook as a reference... just sayin'.... And didn't move from one to the other, still has the notability tag for you've done nothing to show improvement as to notability. In-depth means in-depth. Independent means having nothing to do with the person or anything to do with the person. Onel5969TT me 12:36, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Onel5969 I am done arguing with you. If NASA reference and the other 9 references are not reliable for you then I think you just being adamant not to admit you are wrong. We are here to learn and you are here to pretend like you own the place. Here is an WP:GNG for you -- FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:45, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
.jpg){kind=small}
