Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adnan Bukhari


 * 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.  Sandstein  11:29, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Adnan Bukhari

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:GNG The guy was a suspect but cleared very quickly. Why is there an article about a non-person? Comp;letely non-notable. Now if the guy had been cleared and THEN found to be involved, that would be a different matter!! Petebutt (talk) 07:43, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  08:55, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  08:55, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as per WP:BLP1E (1st choice): This individual was caught up in a terror investigation due to some circumstantial evidence, but was soon cleared. An agent was fired, but was then re-hired. Ho, hum. Sure, there's some news coverage, but where's the lasting significance? This is a low-profile person who is unlikely to make the news ever again. As my 2nd choice, might we be able to merge a bit of the information to some "9/11 investigation" article (or even combine it with Ameer Bukhari to form another article)? GABHello! 20:56, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:08, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:1E. Perhaps reference the confusion in articles related to 9/11 suspects/investigations AusLondonder (talk) 17:22, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as per the two above criteria.  Onel 5969  TT me 18:55, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete I must agree, clearly fails WP:NOTNEWS Omni Flames   let's talk about it  10:33, 14 April 2016 (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.