Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aijaz ahmad mangi


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 09:40, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Aijaz ahmad mangi

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Does not seem to meet WP:BIO. Self-published sources which do not seem to meet WP:RS. Also, please see the article history page for some additional information regarding the CSD A7 tags which were repeatedly removed. Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 09:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC) -- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff)  10:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

More recent article with upper case letters is nominated as well. -- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 10:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete - I see no indication from the included refs that this person "is one of the most outstanding names in urdu and sindhi journalism", or is in any other way not just an ordinary journalist.  AK Radecki Speaketh  18:53, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  | Talk 00:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Same as this Aijaz Ahmed Mangi? In that case, keep. --Apoc2400 (talk) 20:39, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Weakish keep, not that the article didn't qualify for speedy deletion, it did; but I share the suspicion of some here that the subject might be notable. The link above notes that the subject, in addition to being a journalist, became the secretary of the "SAB". Assuming that the SAB refers to the Sindhi Adabi Board, it seems that there may well be information out there to show notability. I agree, the article doesn't do it now, but I am always reluctant to consign non-English subjects to non-notability without giving them every reasonable chance. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  22:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 04:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Withdraw nomination: Although most of the sources are press releases, I'm willing to let this one go. I'll try to do some digging on the sources, and add the reference which (Apoc2400) was able to find,(here) as this is a reliable local news source. Any passing admin can feel free to close, keep and merge any differences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OliverTwisted (talk • contribs) 13:00, April 10, 2009


 * 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.