Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malik Mumtaz Qadri


 * 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   redirect to Salmaan Taseer. Spartaz Humbug! 12:49, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Malik Mumtaz Qadri

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:ONEEVENT. I appreciate details are scant but don't believe topic is notable outside the assassination event, and that can be covered more relevantly in the parent article. On a side note I cannot believe that image is PD or the tag is suitable. S.G.(GH) ping! 14:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC) S.G.(GH) ping! 14:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge There is currently a merge discussion going on which, so far, has attained a consensus of support for a merge. Even the author of the Malik Mumtaz Qadri article has voiced support for a merge.  As it is, there is little independent notability to this person, and a large degree of the article's text (and, as a node to the nominator, the image as well, which I've now removed) was a copyright violation in anycase. Franklinville (talk) 21:15, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect per WP:BLP1E. Agree with merge in principle, but the article has only one cite, so there is not really much to merge. --FormerIP (talk) 21:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Salman_Taseer, as this is the only reason they are notable. SmartSE (talk) 23:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Salman Taseer, per Smartse, as the only thing this person is notable for is the assassination. Bcperson89 (talk) 23:25, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge per Talk:Salmaan Taseer. --Joshua Issac (talk) 00:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the Salman Taseer page. Person has not been notable aside from one event and it is still unlikely we will find a lot about him, apart from the fact that he was just an assassinator who was destined to assassinate a politician. 58.169.184.178 (talk) 01:33, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I think this page should remain intact as this will a hot topic and people will come looking for more information about Malik Mumtaz Qadri. Besides people will be interested in knowing about the trail and investigation progress with Malik Mumtaz Qadri.
 * Comment That may all indeed be true about what people are interested in, but I suspect that they should find that information in the Taseer article, as Qadri has no independent notability. Taseer's assassination is certainly a hot topic, agreed, but I'm not convinced that Qadri is, or not yet anyway. DBaK (talk) 12:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect per comments above. Any useful text which is not already in the Taseer article should be copied across but I fear there is little or none. DBaK (talk) 12:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Please note that the article is alive and well at its new name Malik Mumtaz Hussain Qadri. Only Malik Mumtaz Qadri is already redirected, so this is a job half done. The history is a little obscure but it appears that someone objected to, and undid, the redirect on MMQ, feeling there was no consensus, and then it was later moved to MMHQ and MMQ only was redirected. One result is that the AfD tag on MMHQ is now out of date and does not point to this discussion, so it's all a bit of a mess. I would try to help with that last point but there are fearsome warnings about messing around with the tag, so I will leave it to an admin to ponder. For what it's worth my feeling is it's been done once and the MMHQ article - which is not even linked from the Taseer one! - should go the same way. Best wishes to all DBaK (talk) 12:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Update: - fixed. That's better! DBaK (talk) 13:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC) It's back again, and it's obviously pointless to update this further. DBaK (talk) 22:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Update again: I've undone the redirect from MMQ to the Taseer article, and redirected it to MMHQ instead. Otherwise it just confused the situation, masking the fact that MMHQ still exists and has not been merged or redirected. Since MMQ was moved to MMHQ it would seem to follow that they should be debated together and share a common fate, not be dealt with by halves; MMQ should simply be a redirect to MMHQ until the outcome for both is known. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 11:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Clean up:It requires a major clean up.

 Coercorash Talk Contr. 10:58, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * merge consensus was alredy gained on the talk page merger proposal, i twas then opened by an editor without any reason and against the grain of consensus.(Lihaas (talk) 00:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC));
 * Comment - yes, exactly. But unfortunately this has been a real mess, partly because the debate has been split between this discussion and the Taseer talk page discussion about the merge, with people obviously not knowing what's been said where or referring to differing processes and consensuses (if that's a word). The move, half way through all this, from MMQ to MMHQ has not exactly led to greater clarity either, indeed I would say it has perhaps helped stifle the debate. I hope that this can be resolved, one way or another but with some clarity and finality, soon. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 08:26, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems unanimous here too though ;)talk) 00:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed but I could bet you a Cadbury Creme Egg we haven't heard the last of it ... DBaK (talk) 12:26, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * at this point the onus is on them for consensus,Lihaas (talk) 00:25, 11 January 2011 (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.