Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdul Rauf Asghar


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Armbrust The Homunculus 11:39, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Abdul Rauf Asghar

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Completely incoherent Gazkthul (talk) 05:09, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 June 1.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 05:27, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is badly done, but this man is a wanted terrorist with a violent background. Copyediting and more inline citations are needed.--DThomsen8 (talk) 13:20, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep The article contains an incredible amount of errors (grammar, spelling and structure). Many will need to be redone, and references added. Most of it is likely to have been written by someone without a solid understanding of English. He (Abdul Rauf Asghar) is often referred to as 'it'.  TheTallSomething(talk) 20:16, 1 June 2014 (GMT)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions  Occult Zone  ( Talk ) 13:50, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Is the nominator for real? You do not use AfD to get improvements at an article which is obviously notable. --BabbaQ (talk) 14:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep AfD's are not for articles that are simply in bad shape. —  dain  omite   16:11, 6 June 2014 (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.