Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khalnazar Agakhanov


 * 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. While not strong guideline-based-arguments for keep due to the ambiguity of diplomats, there is certainly no strong consensus for delete. (non-admin closure) Mkdw talk 09:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Khalnazar Agakhanov

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable by WP:DIPLOMAT ("Diplomats who have participated in a significant way in events of particular diplomatic importance that have been written about in reliable secondary sources.")

Similar to 2 Category:Norwegian diplomat stubs articles sent to Afd yesterday, there are about 80 minimal stubs in Category:Asian diplomat stubs that may be non-notable. AFAIK Agakhanov, like most other diplomats, has never been involved in an “event of particular diplomatic importance”.

This Afd will be opposed by editors who believe that diplomats and other unelected officials have automatic notability, unlike writers, artists, scientists, politicians, sportsmen etc. What do afd participants think about this?  Klein zach  03:58, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. I believe that permanent ambassadors have presumptive notability, just like scientists who hold named chairs, politicians who hold national or international offices and professional athletes. Pburka (talk) 11:54, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkmenistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:28, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:28, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. I also believe that ambassadors have a presumption of notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:51, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep This source indicates his being a minister for three different portfolios: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http://www.kommersant.ru/factbook/27736 --Mareklug talk 14:22, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree with (talk). Seems to be fairly notable and satisfies WP:BIO. Article could do with some extra input. scope_creep  (talk) 21:59, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep, Wikipedia should have articles on all permanent ambassadors for the same reason it should have articles on all national legislators, judges on national courts, etc. You can call that "inherent notability" if you like, or a presumption that GNG will always be satisfied for such individuals; I really don't care because satisfying notability guidelines (which are a good but not perfect proxy for determining what is or isn't important enough to include) should not be a concern with obviously important subjects such as this, so long as we follow the policies of V, OR, NPOV (which actually are important all the time). Or you can call it an WP:IAR invocation, because deleting articles on permanent ambassadors does not improve the encyclopedia in any way. postdlf (talk) 02:01, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep on the condition that work is done to bring in more sources, resorting to a Translation if necessary. If not, then I can see this going for a second nomination due to a single source. I checked WP:POLITICIAN and it mentions politicians and judges, but diplomats count as politicians? This is what isn't clear to me personally, though the apparent clarity with other editors is enough to vote for keep for now. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:38, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Our article says that a politician "is a person who is involved in influencing public policy and decision making." I think that ambassadors fit this definition, and therefore ought to be covered as politicians who have "held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office". However I recognize that this interpretation may be controversial. Pburka (talk) 04:11, 21 April 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.