Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Furkat Kasimovich Yusupov


 * 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.  So Why  13:53, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Furkat Kasimovich Yusupov

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Kind of original research. It is not sure all sources speak about the same subject. No reliable sources that speak about the subject. His name is just mention in these documents. IQinn (talk) 11:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't see any reliable sources. Also needs wikifying, though as this is a deletion page, I'd go with delete unless it is improved 137.73.68.56 (talk) 12:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep -- plenty of sources document that this individual was described as a terrorist recruiter, charged, convicted, and sentenced to 18 years. I will remind our nominator that the wikipedia is an international project.  I suggest that no one would challenge an article on an American who had been charged and convicted with similar crimes.  Geo Swan (talk) 13:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * -))You can be assured that my nomination is not based on narrow national thinking as i have traveled to more than 90 countries. Thank's for improving the article, it was a mess. Unfortunately the situation has not changed much. The sources are not very strong and not all sources verify the parts were they are used. I let it up to the other editors here to check that. Cheers IQinn (talk) 13:59, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * If you think an article has weaknesses you believe can be corrected by editing you are not supposed to nominate it for deletion. You seem to be acknowledging that this is a topic that merits coverage, just one that you think has what you regard as addressable weaknesses.  Geo Swan (talk) 14:16, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No that's wrong. It should be deleted. IQinn (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Your original nomination offered two justifications for deletion: (1) Original research; (2) no reliable sources. Do you think it would be possible for you to specify which passage or passage contains original research?  No one is perfect.  If my contribution contains a passage with original research why please, spell out which passage it is.  Draw it to my attention, and maybe there is an alternate passage we can both agree on?  Is it really still your position that the article's sources are unreliable?  Geo Swan (talk) 16:08, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The article contains important informations supported with reliable third-party sources. --Vejvančický (talk) 15:55, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Uzbekistan-related deletion discussions.  —Geo Swan (talk) 16:08, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment -- The individual who nominated this article for deletion, then, subsequently, made a bunch of edits to the article., , , , , , , , and .  As I expressed here, these edits mystified me, because I see those who voice a delete opinion as having gone on record that they can't imagine the article being improved.  I suggested they let those who believe the article should be kept be permitted to present a version that represented their best efforts.  I couldn't help noticing another contributor had raised a similar concern over this nominators edits to another article they nominated for deletion.  Geo Swan (talk) 00:49, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Putting things out of context and teaming up in an uncivil bad faith attack against me instead of working on the issue. This is an content issue well discussed on the articles talk page. Where we are discussing this issue in the first posting of the page. Unfortunately you have not continued the discussion there and instead started a personal attack against me. Go back to the articles talk page and work on content issues instead of attacking people. IQinn (talk) 03:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * For the record I dispute the assertion that we teamed up "in an uncivil bad faith attack". I was unaware of Sherurcij's comment when I drafted mine.  By saying I am "mystified" I leave open the possibility that a good meaningful explanation exists, and will be offered.  In that case I merely say: "I am gob-smacked!  A good meaningful explanation exists!  Mystery solved!"  And, I absolutely dispute the challenge to my good faith.  Geo Swan (talk) 03:19, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, "Yusupov was described as being the leader of a group that executed a series of terrorist bombings on March 28 2004." pretty much makes a textbook case of notability. Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 02:57, 27 November 2009 (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.