Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Feroz Afridi


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Feroz Afridi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lacks general notability from a quick Google check. Autobiographical article which is very self promoting but little to support notability - zero book hits, mainly self created hits on Google, a handful of sketchy passing refs on Google News. Subject-cum-creator keeps removing tags rather than addressing issues so bringing to discussion. Mabalu (talk) 21:34, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Shamelessly promotional - I would have speedied. Deb (talk) 22:15, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I had BLP nominated it, which was removed, and - maybe I'm wrong here - removing a speedy deletion tag means taking it to discussion? Mabalu (talk) 00:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You have done the right thing if you were in doubt. You have nominated it on the basis of lack of notability.  However, if I had seen it before you, I would have speedied it on the grounds of it being promotional. Deb (talk) 11:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:06, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Puffery, should have been speedied. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:52, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Nom. Clearly a totally shameless attempt at self promotion.Rob 301 (talk) 22:23, 6 January 2013 (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.