Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islami Andolan Bangladesh


 * 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. The consensus for keeping is sufficient, and the arguments much more substantial than the nominator's rationale for deletion  DGG ( talk ) 06:03, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Islami Andolan Bangladesh

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. Appears to be a shiney new political party Darkness Shines (talk) 13:17, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:11, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:11, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notable enough because, it is a registered political party in Bangladesh since 2008, when an act was imposed requiring all political parties to be registered at Election Commission (of Bangladesh). It had been led by a religious authority, better known as Chormonai Pir, and this movement had been known as Islamic Shasjontontro Andolon (lit. Islamic Governance Movement) since 1987. The Pir is more prominently known as religions-political figure than the movement itself and albeit, the movement/party is significant enough to be on Wikipedia. That being said, this article need citation improvement. –  nafSadh did say 03:52, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 05:05, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Needs massive improvement on NPOV and probably close monitoring to ensure it stays that way, but I agree it meets notability as described above. It's mentioned in India's National Security Annual Review 2009 and even though most other news sources seem to relate to the Daily Mail story currently used as the sole third-party reference, it would seem to be an article that can be developed. It does badly need more references and context from someone who understands Bangladeshi politics and should be flagged as such. I've started a Talk page. Libby norman (talk) 12:34, 4 October 2014 (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.