Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fehmida Jamali


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:02, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Fehmida Jamali

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable non-elected politician with no significant coverage in reliable sources and fails WP:NPOL. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 19:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 19:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 19:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per the newly added 4 links from reliable sources by the creator of article - User:Ithad. Let's give this article, a fair chance because the person has significant news coverage. In my view, it deserves it because it has 2 references from 2 major newspapers plus 2 other reliable sources from the Pakistani news media. Ngrewal1 (talk) 23:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * None of the sources discuss the topic in depth, as required for notability. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 02:54, 16 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Fails WP:GNG, and WP:NPOL. Störm   (talk)  01:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing here passes WP:NPOL as an "inherently" notable office, so it's all about the quality and depth of the sources. GNG is not just "count the footnotes and keep anybody who gets past two" — GNG also tests sources for depth, range, quality and the context of what the person is getting covered for, so every potential source that exists is not automatically a GNG-building source. For a source to contribute toward getting over GNG, she has to be the subject that other people are speaking about, not the person who's doing the speaking about herself or any other topic. Sources that are actually "about her" are not the same thing as sources that happen to have her name in them — if the source just quotes her speaking about some political issue, while its core subject is that issue rather than her, then it is not a notability-assisting source, but unfortunately that's all of the sources present here. Bearcat (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:29, 18 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete an unelected politician. Sourcing can be found for virtually every candidate but we have decided we do not want article on every candidate.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete fails basic GNG as well Wikipedia:POLITICIAN. --Saqib (talk) 20:46, 20 May 2020 (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.