Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahsan Habib Bhuiyan


 * 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. Sam Walton (talk) 00:13, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Ahsan Habib Bhuiyan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable politician (party functionary) who failed to get his party's nomination for parliament. Non-notable former lecturer. Non-notable newspaper columnist. Acts as an (official?/unofficial?) party spokesperson on talk-shows.

Article was speedied by for failure to credibly indicate significance. Article author removed the speedy against instructions. PRODed by, "Absolutely nothing here for WP:POLITICIAN." Promptly deproded by author without explanation. Tagged for notability by myself, a tag the author or an IP have removed four times in 48 hours, again without any explanation.

The first three cited sources are written by the subject. Then come primary sources, talk-shows on which he appeared. Finally there are reports that range in depth from merely saying he was at an event ("discussion was attended by", "spoke at roundtable", "who took part") to a brief sentence or paragraph quoting or paraphrasing something he said. It's unclear what makes the author think this guy is notable. Spokespeople for government or companies are often named in news reports. That doesn't make them notable. It's the organization they're speaking for that is notable. Worldbruce (talk) 17:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 17:12, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 17:12, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - Yes, and I planned to nominate given the sheer questionability here and there's literally nothing here at all for the notability. SwisterTwister   talk  18:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Notability not apparent. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:15, 21 December 2016 (UTC).
 * Delete not yet notable, may be in the future but is not at present.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:05, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing here is an automatic pass of our inclusion standards for political figures, and the sourcing isn't strongly enough about him to get him over WP:GNG in lieu. Bearcat (talk) 16:25, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per all of the above, and as badly failing my notoriously lax standards for lawyers. All lawyers in the UK are admitted to practice before the Inns of Court. In fact, all lawyers admitted in any jurisdiction are admitted to the highest court in that area. This is a run of the mill lawyer who just does what every attorney is expected to do, as pro bono publico -- and no more. Bearian (talk) 15:00, 28 December 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.