Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khurram Husain


 * 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 delete. Liz Read! Talk! 23:31, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Khurram Husain

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Majority of the sources are lists of articles they've written for a particular publication or articles they've written. One or two appear to be interviews with them, but I'm not sure that's enough to meet WP:NPEOPLE.  Ravensfire  (talk) 19:54, 14 June 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:46, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Economics,  and Pakistan.  Ravensfire  (talk) 19:54, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep He is well-known journalist and columist of Pakistan about business and economy.He works for well-known news papers and channels such as BBC, The Express Tribune and Dawn News paper English, which i have already mentioned in article with citations.Zimi09 (User talk: Zimi09) 4:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Simply working for significant newspapers doesn't mean a person is notable. There are a lot of journalists at those companies that don't meet notability requirements.  There needs to be several sources with significant coverage about that person. Notability is not inherited.  Ravensfire  (talk) 13:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete Writing for reliable sources doesn't confer notability, and I wasn't able to find profiles in said caliber of sources that would demonstrate SIGCOV. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs  talk 19:27, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article is sourced to publications for which the subject is a contributing author. As such, these publications lack independence from the subject and can not be used as sources towards proving notability per wikipedia's guidelines. Fails WP:SIGCOV for lack of independent sources.4meter4 (talk) 21:43, 28 June 2022 (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.