Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ayqa Khan


 * 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. We do not usually consider coverage we wish were there when deciding on whether an article merits to exist, but we sure consider coverage which exists and is uncontested. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:40, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Ayqa Khan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability. All the refs seem to be both niche and are either press releases or reported interviews. Nothing here is independent and reliable. The whole article reads as a promotional piece. Probably way too soon. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk 09:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:25, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:25, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:26, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Non-white figures, women in particular, are persistently underrepresented on the site and arguing that the coverage they have had isn't good enough is one reason why. Rookie, Huffington Post and WNYC are all reputable platforms. Further, the page was last edited substantively in March of 2017. Did you make any attempt to find more recent references before applying the deletion tag? This is a good example of a page that requires revision rather than deletion. If the writing reads like a promotional piece - and to be clear, I wrote it and have no affiliation with her - then the writing can be reworked. Obviously, my vote is to Keep it. --Dnllnd (talk) 13:00, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've made various text edits and have added more references. I encourage you to do the same. --Dnllnd (talk) 13:32, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:GNG .None of the references are WP:RS and none of them have significant coverage about the subject.122.164.255.107 (talk) 15:44, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * "..none of them have significant coverage about the subject" is untrue. Feel free to argue for page deletion, but can we at least agree to do so in good faith? --Dnllnd (talk) 16:10, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The editor you're replying to is an IP with 3 edits, all to AfD. I doubt the closing admin is going to give that a lot of weight.  A  Train talk 16:27, 11 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Looks like a well-sourced article to me. Depth of coverage from WP:RSes like the Village Voice, VICE, and WNYC. Her work was selected for a major exhibition at the Cooper Union, which should satisfy WP:ARTIST criterion 4.  A  Train talk 16:26, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep .Pakistani Wikipedian (talk)
 * Delete arguments that the coverage of certain ethnic groups is not quality enough to pass notability guidelines is admission that people are not noted. Wikipedia is not a forum to right great wrongs. We follow actual coverage, not the coverage people wish was there, and in this case we lack coverage that rises to the level required by our notability guidelines for artists.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:35, 16 October 2017 (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.