Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ehsan Ullah 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. (non-admin closure)  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   02:30, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Ehsan Ullah Khan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

BLP tagged since 2015 for multiple issues. The source-bombing consists of fleeting mentions on sites or articles that are not about Ehsan Ullah Khan, dead links, and non RS. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:02, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 06:11, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 06:12, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep The article cites a number of sources of questionable reliablity or relevance, but it also cites a substantial newspaper article in DAWN and a book by Junius P. Rodriguez  both arms-length reliable sources containing in-depth coverage of Ehsan Ullah Khan. To those one could add another book, by Craig Kielburger, that is also an independent reliable source containing significant coverage. So meets WP:GNG and WP:BIO. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:33, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:36, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep per nom and Worldbruce's excellent research. Agree that subject meets WP:GNG and WP:BIO. ArchieOof (talk) 14:06, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:47, 4 September 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Music1201  talk  00:40, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep This article does a well job of establishing WP:Notability, has multiple sources, and a clear subject. Chase (talk) 00:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep -- the subject is clearly notable per available sources. Citing within the article could be better, but I see this page as a candidate for improvement, not deletion. Slavery in the Modern World is a good source and should be added to the article. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:02, 17 September 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.