Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdul Latif Khan Tarin


 * 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. The policy/guideline-based arguments by and large posit that the subject fails WP:GNG / WP:SOLDIER due to lack of secondary sources combined with a relatively low amount of exclusivity for the award mentioned in the article. slakr \ talk / 08:04, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Abdul Latif Khan Tarin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SOLDIER. The IDSM is the third level medal & Jemadar Tarin, received the decoration once, because he was KIA at the Duhaila battle. – S. Rich (talk) 06:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * KEEP I think, as historically speaking, this is a significant time for commemorating the role and contribution of Indian soldiers in World War 1, and that the Jemadar did seem to have played a significant role in a particular battle at a certain time, and why should that be neglected? Its not only VCs who did an important job, many other soldiers, including IOMs and IDSMs, should be recognised. This is a good article and I support it. Thanks. 39.54.227.139 (talk) 14:12, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Col (r) Mumtaz Khan, Pakistan


 * I don't know if, as the article's creator I should comment or not, but i do agree with the views expressed above that this is the centenary 1914-2014 commemorative year, and that there were many Indian soldiers who served with exemplary bravery and died in the Great War. Not all received the Victoria Cross-- some were recepients of lesser awards, but that does not certainly detract from their role and/or importance. I am working on this article and it will be a good one, in time, I am sure, and I do hope I will be given the chance of doing so. So, I request that we KEEP it. Sincerely, AsadUK200 (talk) 14:20, 7 September 2014 (UTC)AsaudUK200


 * I say let's Keep it! What's the problem really? As it is, there are so few articles on Indian native officers and soldiers from before 1947, and this one is a rarity, i feel. If you look at the category section on 'Indian Army personnel of World War 1', you will note that most of the names there are British or English officers, colonists, not natives or locals: and many of them havent any real achievements to their names, theyre just listed there because they were 'officers' and 'toffs'. Even among the few native officers, some are Maharajas i.e. princes who just had the privilege of participating in the World War 1 at a certain 'exalted' level, see Ganga Singh and Daulat Singh for example. Also, there are a number of Englishmen just  simply listed for their priviliged positions and who received MBEs, CBEs etc for no real scrifices, see Bernard Brodhurst and Harold Berridge for example. One doesnt see why theyre 'important' and worthy of keeping but a bona fide soldier like Abdul Latif Khan, who gave his life for future generations, isnt? If the IDSM is an issue, there are some other Indian soldiers who also just received the IOM or IDSM like Gurmukh Singh Saini and Shah Zaman Khan, shouldnt we also remove them before we remove or delete Abdul Latif Khan Tarin? There is even an officer Muhammed Akbar Khan who is there because his 'achievement' was that he served in both World War 1 and World War 2 and later remained ADC to Pakistan's first governor-general. I feel this is all rather arbitrary. Either let's keep Latif Khan Tarin or lets also delete all these others too, as mentioned above, since they also dont seem to meet the supposed WP criteria. I think Ive said enough. RizwanaJ (talk) 14:51, 7 September 2014 (UTC)RizwanaJ
 * Brodhurst meets the notability criteria as a cricketer who appeared in a professional match, Berridge as the holder of the CIE, which is considered to qualify under WP:ANYBIO #1. Gurmukh Singh Saini may qualify as the holder of two awards for gallantry (a borderline case, certainly); Shah Zaman Khan qualifies as he later became military commander of one of the princely states; Muhammed Akbar Khan qualifies as he became a general. Let's not start getting racist ("a number of Englishmen just simply listed for their priviliged positions"). Many, many thousands of Englishmen who won the MC or MM, the equivalent of the IDSM, don't qualify either. And many Indians who appeared in professional cricket matches or were awarded the CIE do. Not one person has (or should have) an article because they were an 'officer' or a 'toff'. And nobody qualifies or does not qualify because of their ethnicity or nationality. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:53, 8 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Some good points RizwanaJ. I personally agree, should Keep. I also believe (a) the subject of this article Jemadar Tarin, played an important role at a significant military event (the Battle of Dujaila) so he fits quite into the WP Military History acceptability guidelines, and (b) as far as general Wikipedia standards are concerned, it is clear that the content doesnt really make the subject or article notable, its actually the subject that is in the first instance notable. From the various primary and secondary sources one gets the clear impression, on review, that the subject Jemadar Tarin has a certain notability that precedes this article based on activity and, or deed(s) of note performed by him in a particular context and at a specific time. Having said that, there is also the option (if people want to badly delete this as a separate article)of merging part of this article, in abbreviated form, with the larger article on the 82nd Punjabis. I wonder if that would be more suitable? Khani100 (talk) 17:21, 7 September 2014 (UTC)Khani100


 * Comments by OP – I fear that one argument for keeping runs counter to WP:NOTMEMORIAL. (And I sympathize with the WP:OTHERSTUFF argument; WP has hundreds of one line articles about football players simply because their names have shown up on a website that list team rosters.) In this case the question is whether Tarin's role at Dujaila was WP:NOTEWORTHY. If so, then the role should be mentioned in that article. I do not see enough notability for a separate article. Still, I see that 39.54.227.139 (Col. Khan) has added 3 further reading items. Do they describe Tarin's role? If so, these books should be used to flesh out this article.  AsaudUK200, you are certainly welcome to comment. Thank you.  – S. Rich (talk) 18:39, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Dear Sir S.Rich, thank you very much for your comments here and also on my User Talk page. I have noted your previous comments and I have also seen the comments made above by several people. Sir, I am neither related to Jemadar Abdul Latif Khan nor do I have a personal interest etc; I cant say about comments made by other folks here, but I do think that some of the points made are rather valid. First of all, Jemadar Abdul Latif Khan doesnt fall in the 'Other Stuff' or one liner category as implied, please. He was a gallant person who did perform a number of fine deeds, and his role at Dujaila was also certainly notable. I have started this article very recently on 1st September and will certainly get round to developing it, and adding more relevant material (as already stated in my note/summary when I started this) --Im an old man now, and retired, and I have cardiac and diabetes problems, and maybe I cant hurry with my research and adding/developing articles with any fast speed. I hope you will please kindly grant me some time, in this respect, to develop this article at my own pace thanks. Secondly, The IDSM shouldnt be treated as a 'third award', its nothing to be sneezed at. As a military historian Im sure you must realise the value of this in the historical contexts? When it was instituted in 1907 it was the second highest award available to Indians, behind the Indian Order of Merit, however, when eligibility for the Victoria Cross was extended to cover all Commonwealth subjects in 1911, the IDSM became third highest in the order of precedence. It was instituted in order to recognise acts of gallantry that did not meet the standards required of the IOM. Its own unique value must be recognised. Also, I must thank here Col Mumtaz Khan who has added a small bibliography--to answer you, no, not all these three books mention Jemadar Latif Khan Tarin directly, only Brig Rizvi's history makes a decent mention; whereas Maj Qureshi talks about the battle of Dujaila and the role of the 82nd Punjabis there, and their losses sustained to save General Aylmer Fenton from embarassment, in a number of ways. John Gaylor's book is basically a general account of each regiment and not detailed, but shows the evolution of the Madras army and the transformation of the 82nd to a 'Punjabi' unit. I shall certainly be using at least Brig Rizvi's book, as well as other material to add to and develop this article about this officer. May I finally also say, that there certainly is a valid case for the fact that Indian soldiers from the British Indian Army , whether VCs, or IOMs or IDSMs, do deserve recognition at this point in time, for over 1.3 million of them came forward for the War and over 75,000 of them lie dead overseas-- Sikhs, Muslims, Hindus etc-- in many theaters from Europe to Persia/Iran. I hope that as a military historian you will also please sympathise with my perspective and kindly help me out, by allowing me to continue work on this new work or labour of love, painstakingly carried out. Im sorry I have simply gone on too long, here, but though I havent started or posted many articles, I have been an occasional yet serious scholar and editor. It would be very kind if you could cooperate, thank you. With best regards, AsadUK200 (talk) 20:58, 7 September 2014 (UTC)AsadUK200
 * To explain this process, the nomination normally remains open until consensus is clear. As the nominator, I can withdraw/close the AFD as a keep. But I cannot close it as a delete. (That step requires an administrator.) That said, I am talking your comments to heart. The article does have WP:POTENTIAL.  So I propose to leave this nomination open for a couple of more days. These AFDs often attract editors who help "rescue" articles. I'll probably close the AFD as a keep.  – S. Rich (talk) 21:22, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Dear Sir, thank you very much, I value your kind cooperation and help and I hope to do a good job asap, in developing and making this a good and reliable article of Wikipedia standards. I think this is a good idea to keep this discussion open, its valuable feedback and I appreciate your points. Sincerely, AsadUK200 (talk) 21:47, 7 September 2014 (UTC)AsadUK200
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 8 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete does not meet GNG. Wikipedia is not a memorial. EricSerge (talk) 02:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - a Google Books search didn't reveal any significant coverage that I could see. Fails the WP:GNG and is therefore not notable. No doubt a brave soldier but insufficient coverage to justify a stand alone article. If indeed his role in the Battle of Dujaila was important there is no reason it cannot be covered in that article assuming that there are reliable sources to support the information and it is added in a way that does not constitute undue weight. Anotherclown (talk) 08:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. The IDSM, as a third-level award, is certainly not enough for notability. This has been long established. If we have an article on this individual, then we should also have articles on every British soldier who won the MC or MM, for instance, or every American who won the Silver Star, as an equivalent award. That's many, many thousands of men. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:44, 8 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep please. I dont think that there are that many existing records for all the Indian soldiers who ever got the IDSM, so articles cant be made on most of them. It's indeed rare (please see the notes above on this discussion) to have an article like this. I have also started work on this and other editors are also working on it as an ongoing exercise and I think that, again, referring above to the previous discussion, it has some scope and potential. There are also, already many articles that are existing on Wikipedia (see note by User:RizwanaJ above) that are similarly not very highly notable but still reflect some degree of notability. If we delete this article then those ones should also be deleted. Sleva402 (talk) 15:06, 8 September 2014 (UTC)Sleva402


 * Honestly, as the creator of this article I dont know what to say/comment anymore. In my earlier comments and discussions above, I think I have laid out all my ideas and points, in very great detail. I dont agree that this soldier isnt notable, and I think that his role at one battle was quite notable indeed although there is little published material in this regard, but there is some and I will include this in time. I had earlier requested User S.Rich that I should please be given time, to develop and expand, some other people are also trying to help out. It's a new article, many articles on Wikipedia started very weakly too and developed over time.At least, let's not just delete it out of hand? I would also like to reject the views expressed above that Im trying to use Wikipedia as some sort of 'memorial' or that I have any personal connection or interest-- just simply not true. I know that the comments are made by some senior and highly experienced editors in good faith, but I wanted to clarify this. Finally, I dont know. I think that the people here know better whats right and though I dont want to see this article deleted, I would be happy to accomodate. AsadUK200 (talk) 15:24, 8 September 2014 (UTC)AsadUK200
 * Please explain what makes this officer more significant than a British officer awarded the Military Cross, the equivalent level award (and for which, as a jemadar, he would also have been eligible), which would also not qualify for an article. And explain why an exception should be made for him to the widely-accepted essay WP:SOLDIER. Because I see an heroic officer awarded a third-level decoration in the normal circumstances for which one is awarded a third-level decoration. Nothing out of the ordinary apart from the fact he happened to be an Indian; which actually doesn't make it out of the ordinary at all, since thousands of Indian soldiers were decorated for gallantry in the First World War. I fail to see why we should make an exception to our normal requirements of a first-level decoration or two second-level decorations (or even, to make it fair, three second- or third-level decorations, which is my usual standard for notability). -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:03, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Please see my earlier comment. Although I would like to KEEP this article, it might perhaps be better to Redirect or Merge with either the page on the Indian Distinguished Service Medal or the 82nd Punjabis. I wonder what the views on that would be? Khani100 (talk) 15:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)Khani100


 * Delete - While looking at content and the position of the people mentioned in the article, editors should not forget WP:N while keeping in mind that significant coverage in reliable sources important. -- C ute st Penguin Hangout 17:59, 8 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Dear User:Cutest Penguin and others, please, I have already made a note of this point, do please read the previous comments and discussion before making new comments which are repetitious, thanks. I have already commented, also, as creator, above. And have discussed this matter with S.Rich on his Talk Page too; and though I do have some more relevant and 'notable' references (I think) there arent very many, honestly. I also feel that the article should be kept but if not, then I find that the views of User Khani100 are sensible, it could be merged/redirected to the Indian Distinguished Service Medal page, which already has a small list of recepients. Just as a reminder, some 6000 people received the IDSM between 1907 and 1947 when it was done away with. That doesnt make it too common a medal you know. According to most military historians and medals collectors, a larger part of the recepients , maybe some 70-80% dont have many records left at all. I would welcome more guidance/help and feedback thanks again . AsadUK200 (talk) 09:46, 9 September 2014 (UTC)AsadUK200
 * You have already left your suggestion as per Afd, and there is no need of mentioning things again and again. Your comments appearing WP:COI for me and its like you are trying to convince the AfD.  C ute st Penguin Hangout 12:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Since 6,000 IDSMs were awarded, it makes no sense to single out a few of them to list on the Indian Distinguished Service Medal page unless those few were particularly unusual, which this officer wasn't. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:18, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Note • For me some of above comments appears to be the WP:COI and there is great sense of Sock puppetry. Admin with checkuser right requested to see the case. Thanks!  C ute st Penguin Hangout 16:08, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


 * User:Cutest Penguin Im sorry that you seem to have taken this discussion in a highly negative light. I will only repeat that I am a 'bona fide' editor, here, although not so regular or experienced, and am maybe not so familiar with all the abbreviations and terminologies that you use here to overawe and intimidate. However, I have in the past done some good work here and youre welcome to check that up. I am a retired academic and well known writer and I dont have any special 'interest' as you seem to imply, sadly, I am sorry that I started off this article, now. It seems that the good faith principle isnt deemed very important here. Also, dear Necrothesp, yes, maybe out of 6000 medal recepients Jemadar Latif Khan wasnt 'exceptional' but still, I think that since there are surviving proper records of so few of these, it would surely be valuable even by Wikipedia standards to have knowledge available about these few? Once again, as I stated above, if you all feel so strongly about this and feel that the article doesnt meet your 'standards', sure delete it by all means. Best regards, AsadUK200 (talk) 18:32, 9 September 2014 (UTC)AsadUK200


 * Once again, I will repeat that although naturally I would like to keep it, I dont mind if the article is deleted and I have given reasons and rationale both here and on the User Talk Page of the original deletion proposer. But I would certainly request, that rather than outrightly rejecting and deleting this article, it would certainly be preferable if it might be possibly Redirected to another linked article, or a section of a linked article, as deemed fit. I had like the idea/proposal of linking/redirecting this to the Indian Distinguished Service Medal page but some editors seem to have an objection to this. However, it might be good to consider this option, please, and also, alternatives such as the 82nd Punjabis or Punjab Regiment or a number of other redirect options. Thanks, good wishes, AsadUK200 (talk) 19:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)AsadUK200
 * 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.