Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azamat Abdoullaev

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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 09:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Azamat Abdoullaev, USECS

Autobiography whose subject, Azamat Abdoullaev, has reverted NPOV tags and other attempts at cleanup. Subject claims to have invented a major system of computerised ontology, but only gates 47 unique Google hits. One verifiable published book, published by F.I.S. Intelligent Systems, for which no search results (so almost certainly self-published, especially since the publisher name does not include anythign like "press" or "publishing"). Smells strongly of vanity, even after some claims have been toned down. Also rolling in USECS, his ontological database, which scores exactly nine Googles under its full name (the initialism is ambiguous, although googling the initialism also returns a fair bit of spam pushing the autor of the article). I call vanity. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] 13:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. I call it vanity too. PJM 13:56, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. eLNuko 13:58, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, self-promoting BS artist. Daniel Case 14:52, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Possibly userfy the autobiography if he wants to keep it. Notability is not really established, verification is iffy. If it's so great, someone else will eventually write about it anyway. NickelShoe 14:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Terence Ong 15:46, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete but it we should let the creator know that his articles are up for deletion. There's a lot of work on both of them. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 17:49, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Already did. It's awful that so few people actually do that... It's common courtesy, and the only way to actually have a debate about the article's merits. NickelShoe 21:52, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
• Comment User:Ontoquantum just did some major trimming of USECS. It doesn't add any more evidence of notability, but I thought you might like to know. NickelShoe 22:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I believe that User:Ontoquantum is a sock puppet for Azamat Abdoullaev although he denies it. They both work on the same articles. This appears to be original reserarch and should be deleted. Maustrauser 00:08, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

• I have tagged Ontoquantum as a sock. Guy 09:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as per nom. Kensson
• Delete as above.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. Is Azamat Abdoullaev cited within another article about one of his purpored achievements by someone else? If not, seems clear-cut case for deletion. Holon 03:34, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. It only took me two usecs to decide. Garglebutt / (talk) 06:26, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. *drew 06:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: Azamat's bio is a self-bio, which is discouraged, and no evidence of sufficient notability has been shown. As for the USECS, this is original research unless and until this scheme of his gains usage or interest outside of its creator. Apparently, his aim is to create a universal hierarchical categorization scheme for everything that exists; best of luck to him on that. Such schemes, even if they catch on, have always ended up encapsulating the biases of their creators (see the Dewey Decimal System, for instance). *Dan T.* 13:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. Ig0774 06:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

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.