User talk:Geo Swan/archive/2018-01

__NOINDEX__

Proposed deletion of Ezatullah Mujahid


The article Ezatullah Mujahid has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "As a district governor, he fails WP:NPOL (requires state/province level or above for guaranteed notability). The citations given are mere trivial mentions or quotes from Ezatullah, not in-depth coverage of him as required by WP:GNG."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 09:57, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tnuza Jamal Hassan


The article Tnuza Jamal Hassan has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Doesn't seem to qualify for an article at this point, under WP:BLP1E and WP:BLPCRIME - an otherwise not notable individual not yet convicted of a crime."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nat Gertler (talk) 17:40, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I thought nominator 's justification was questionable, and so I asked them some questions. They removed the prod and escalated to AFD, which also struck me as questionable.


 * One of nominator's last comments, prior to the jump to AFD, was a claim I was lapsing from WP:NOTNEWS. I was caught in an edit conflict...  Since their last comment was basically a Foxtrot Oscar, I am putting my last reply here.


 * The wikipedia's policies, and other wikidocuments, have always been too complicated, sometimes ambiguous, sometimes contradictory. This is only getting worse.


 * Actually, I refreshed my memory of NOTNEWS recently. It has four numbered subsections. Numbers 1, 3, and 4 are "Original reporting". "Who's Who" and "A Diary".  I think I can trust your link to NOTNEWS has nothing to do with subsections 1, 3 or 4...


 * So, what does it have to do with subsection 2? Subsection 2 says:
 * {| class="wikitable"


 * Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. While including information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information. Timely news subjects not suitable for Wikipedia may be suitable for our sister project Wikinews. Wikipedia is also not written in news style.
 * Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. While including information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information. Timely news subjects not suitable for Wikipedia may be suitable for our sister project Wikinews. Wikipedia is also not written in news style.


 * }
 * The passage "routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports" -- can we agree that the Hassan article is none of those?


 * The passage also says: "While including information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information."


 * What does this mean? Is the article "treat differently" the recent information about Hassan?  I suggest that phrase is only appropriate when discussing how new information should be made to fit into an article that already existed.


 * As for "information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate" -- so, did you have a reason to suggest his is not one of the occasions when new information is not appropriate? Geo Swan (talk) 02:57, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Tnuza Jamal Hassan for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tnuza Jamal Hassan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Tnuza Jamal Hassan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Nat Gertler (talk) 23:52, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

ANI
I have opened an ANI case regarding this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:BLP_zealot&oldid=822055068

Discretionary sanctions alert
TonyBallioni (talk) 03:31, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
 * This is just to let you know that there are special rules in place for anything regarding living people on Wikipedia, and that administrators are allowed to use special measures to enforce those rules. It implies no wrong doing at all, and I am giving it to only because you have recently had an article deleted under the BLP policy, so I thought you should be aware of this. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:34, 28 January 2018 (UTC)