Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haroon Janjua


 * 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 no consensus. The center of the discussion was regarding WP:GNG and WP:JOURNALIST, and whether or not this article subject met these guidelines. It also centered around Haroon Janjua and whether or not the awards are notable, and hence whether or not the article subject is notable as being a recipient. In the end, both sides made statements that basically stated "yes, this meets the guideline" and "yes, the awards are notable" vs "no, this does not meet the guideline" and "no, the awards are not notable". The sources provided here seemed to be providing primary coverage on the award ceremony or event or primarily covering the award itself more-so than providing primary coverage on the person. In the end, neither side made direct and compelling arguments that fully took the concerns from the opposition into account. Therefore, I find that there is no consensus regarding the deletion of this article.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Haroon Janjua

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails to meet GNG and WP:JOURNALIST. most of the cited ref are self published. Saqib (talk) 04:41, 25 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep the WP:JOURNALIST criteria is not very helpful as it is shared with Artist and other creative professionals. The Haroon_Janjua section is enough for me - that's more recognition than 95% of journalists get, and especially for a relatively young person. Legacypac (talk) 04:48, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Most of the awards are not notable. --Saqib (talk) 05:24, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * But the first one is notable for sure. Presented by the UN Secretary General. Legacypac (talk) 05:39, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Whatsoever, the subject clearly fails GNG. receiving an award which does not have its own Wikipedia page, does not makes one notable. --Saqib (talk) 13:57, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 05:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 05:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 05:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * He won silver right here . I found video of the presentations from 2015 (not Moon preesenting) and 2016 when Moon presented. I suspect the author got confused. So the Moon part should be removed. Legacypac (talk) 05:57, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Apparently the subject himself writing this autobio. --Saqib (talk) 06:00, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Someone tagged it that way, and an acct by the same name edited it, but an IP wrote it. I noticed the first edit by the subject was to fix his name, which is not something the subject would have gotten wrong if he was the creator. Also the page contains enough ESL stlye errors that I doubt it was professionally written. But who knows really. Legacypac (talk) 06:25, 25 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I think the article is notable enough,  however it needs alot of improvement.    M A A Z     T A L K   13:36, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Seemingly, article appears on some notable personality but when one digs deep, more or less it is a promotional autobio piece. It would be better if you explicitly cite some references to establish the notability of the subject instead of posting vague search results which does not bring anything either. Writing for major publications does not makes one notable enough to quality for Wikipedia entry. --Saqib (talk) 14:00, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * We need articles about the subject, not by the subject.And, please don't link G-Search pages, as they are meaningless as to determination of reliability et al. ~ Winged Blades Godric 11:12, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Notable sources about the subject:


 * https://www.hipinpakistan.com/news/1148590
 * http://www.edinburghjournalisminternational.com/competition
 * https://www.thecable.ng/thecable-editor-fisayo-soyombo-shortlisted-2015-thomson-foundation-journalist-award
 * http://unca.com/2015-unca-awards-winners/
 * https://www.mcgilldaily.com/2016/01/labouring-for-unpayable-debt/   M A A Z     T A L K   11:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment this person actually accomplished some impressive widely fead work. He got awards for the work. Way more notable than most olympic athletes or pageant winners who are barely noticed. Legacypac (talk) 15:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * But you're missing the point. I am unable to find a single source which discusses the subject directly and in detail which means the subject fails to pass basic GNG. The subject may have received some awards, but not all of them are notable or major enough. On the other hand, you yourself nominated this BLP for speedy deletion only a couple of day ago and now you want to kept it. --Saqib (talk) 07:18, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I tagged a batch of AfC "Advert" declines as a test and cleanup exercise. This was one of the few tat survived. Legacypac (talk) 07:31, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * , you're just being acutely disruptive over here.Moving this kind of acute-promo-stuff to main-space, after a declined G11 seems to be the very definition of pointy action to me and it is not the sought end-result of the repealing of your restrictions.If you find some notability in the draft, please clean the article up, to minimal qualities. ~ Winged Blades Godric 08:40, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Well I genuinely feel this subject is about 100 times more accomplished and notable than the subjects of many bios here. For example most cricket players (some of whom can't even be verified to have existed beyond a score sheet entry have pages), East German handball players, pageant winners and one hit music artists that are auto notable for radio play are kept at AfD. By hey we have to accept that Wikipedia values fancruft far more than professionals who actually accomplish useful work. Reporters that go into tough areas and do hard work that wins them awards are less interesting than American teenagers with great genes who attend a one day contests and get a sash and crown. Legacypac (talk) 15:34, 28 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete--None of the awards are notable.The first one is one conferred by UN, upon those who cover their work in hallowing prose.Just because it's UN, it hardly means that they are adverse to self-promotion.And, this is G11-able stuff. ~ Winged Blades Godric 08:43, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * On that basis we should toss out all industry awards starting with all pageants which are purely self servibg attention getting awards conferred by the pageant companies to generate press.Legacypac (talk) 15:34, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * And, we regularly do that in all-most all cases of CORP-articles.But, as much as there are reputed journalism awards (none of which has been clinched by the subject), there exists notable and intellectually independent industry-awards too! ~ Winged Blades Godric 11:12, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * A section you cut out " Haroon Janjua had published an article on November 4, 2016, about the plight of the lady from Afghanistan, Sharbat Gula who had been arrested and locked up in Pakistan for purportedly obtaining a fake Pakistani ID after a crackdown. According to the article, "Gula’s face is well-known around the world. American photographer Steve McCurry’s 1984 portrait of Gula, then a 12-year-old orphan in a Pakistani refugee camp, became one of National Geographic magazine’s most famous cover images" actually deals with a story he published that I remember distinctly as being covered by other media. He tracked down Afghan Girl and published about her. Other media reported on his story. I'll see if I can dig up refs. Legacypac (talk) 15:34, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It was Steve McCurry himself who first reported about Gula's arrest on November 3. Also see this Guardian report from October 2016 and from February 2015. --Saqib (talk) 15:54, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * So this is coat tailing on the story he was not involved in. Ok, if we have debunked some claims and Winged thinks all the awards are useless than there is nothing I more can say. Legacypac (talk) 15:56, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you still in favour of keep it. I think it would be better if you clarify because other users (see below) quoting you. --Saqib (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - no significant coverage in WP:RS. Sorry to say but Maaz mentioned links isn't what needs to pass WP:NJOURNALIST. Non-notable awards. Störm   (talk)  18:23, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, as per Legacypac and User:Ma'az. He is notable and written a lot. --Spasage (talk) 19:16, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * And, how does writing a lot equates to passage of notability guidelines?! ~ Winged Blades Godric 11:12, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 07:26, 2 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Note for closing admin: Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive980 --Saqib (talk) 15:00, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note for closing admin -- Please ignore this instance of Poisoning the well by Saqib. If that RfC closes by banning the indicated users from AfD then fine, but it has not closed yet, and the fact that it exists means nothing.  Anyone here could start exactly such an RfC on Saqib's AfD practices and obviously there's no conclusion to be drawn from that. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 14:49, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note for closing admin -- **Note The IP address is suspected of socking and an investigation is under way at Sockpuppet investigations/Unscintillating. Furthermore, it is suspected that a XFD topic banned user is behind this IP per Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents. Furthermore, it is obvious from the discussion that there's a clear consensus to topic ban the reported users. --Saqib (talk) 14:56, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note for closing admin -- Saqib can't stop poisoning the well here. Sure there's an open sock puppet investigation on me.  One in which no one but two disgruntled AfD editors thinks there's a possibility I'm doing anything wrong, which I'm not.  Still open proceedings are not evidence of anything, otherwise they wouldn't still be open. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep -- Per Legacypac. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 14:49, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable prizes, writing news stories, it all looks pretty ROUTINE for a journalist. Notability is validated by having other journalists write about you, which I am not finding.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:52, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TonyBallioni (talk) 00:02, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep has the sources to pass GNG, plus at least the first award is notable. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs )~ 15:12, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you show that this is a notable award? According to the linked article, he won the silver (presumably second place) 2015 United Nations Correspondents Association.  The WP subhead page on these awards is unsourced, no lists of former awardees.  Can you demonstrate that 2nd place for this award is a notable prize?E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:26, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * which sources? The article cite only 3 and none discuss the subject in depth but merely namechecking. --Saqib (talk) 15:19, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, the standard set for sources to support claims within an article is a lower standard than that for sources to establish WP:N. And I don't think the cited and provided sources meet the criteria for establishing notability. --Saqib (talk) 14:58, 16 April 2018 (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.