Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Houzan Mahmoud


 * 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) Mhhossein (talk) 05:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Houzan Mahmoud

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article doesn't meet WP:NOTCSD. This article doesn't have enough sources to prove that the person is notable. Also, there is no enough information about the person Ferakp (talk) 09:41, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 09:57, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I'll say this much: WP:NOTCSD doesn't mean what you think it does and "there is no enough information about the person" is an absurd rationale, in this case. "Doesn't have enough sources to prove that the person is notable" doesn't say that they don't exist, and indeed, the news links do reveal more sources available -- whether they are in-depth enough is another issue. WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:10, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 10:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I should also add that this appears to be related to the editor's POV warring at Talk:Kurdish_women. The concern as far as I can tell appears to be the no article can exist which in the nominator's view "blackwashes" Kurds and he seems especially sensitive to removing any reference that there has ever been such a thing as honour killing of women by Kurds. That's my interpretation of it anyway. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:41, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:42, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:42, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:42, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Is notable, and has coverage from reliable sources. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 13:09, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed Shawn, he has not been following NPOV. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 13:20, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep sufficient coverage from reliable sources. Keep it with a 'needs help' banner. VanEman (talk) 19:25, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep By simple googling I can find quite a few references. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 11:28, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - per WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 11:49, 12 April 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.