Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aimal Qazi


 * 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) Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:47, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Aimal Qazi

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This man is only notable for one event and this is basically a duplicate article of 1993 shootings at CIA Headquarters which is what is actually notable. LuciferWildCat (talk) 20:40, 25 January 2012 (UTC) Note the article was created by a blocked editor for abusing multiple accounts.LuciferWildCat (talk) 20:51, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Could the Execution and burial section of the article show that Aimal Qazi is notable not only for the attack? Apokrif (talk) 21:38, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * He was executed for this one event, dying isn't notability.LuciferWildCat (talk) 00:48, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I was mainly referring to the circumstances of his funeral: "his funeral was attended by the entire civil hierarchy of Balochistan, the local Pakistan Army Corps Commander and the Pakistani Ambassador to the United States". Apokrif (talk) 16:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I'm not sure that he is what we would call a low-profile individual, who we expect to remain such. The event is significant.  His role within it is both substantial and well-documented. The significance is indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources.  We have hundreds of articles that discuss him, and coverage has persisted for years -- though one should note that there are various spellings of his name.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:30, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment it's still a duplicate of the event.LuciferWildCat (talk) 23:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * AfD is not for editing concerns -- those can be addressed on the talkpages of the articles.


 * As to WP:BLP1E, in pertinent part it says "If the event is significant and the individual's role within it is substantial and well-documented ... a separate biography may be appropriate. The significance of an event or individual is indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources." Here, the RSs that you can read by clicking the above links (leading to thousands of articles and books) appear to me to reflect such persistent coverage.--Epeefleche (talk) 23:50, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - Reliable soucres, significant role in events.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:12, 29 January 2012 (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.