Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matta,sindh


 * 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. Deletion concerns appear to have been addressed. It appears that sources have been found establishing the topic's notability. (non-admin closure) Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  03:47, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Matta,sindh

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Only given reference does not mention him. No indication of WP:notability. noq (talk) 16:27, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. I edited the article, changed its name to Matta (chief), and changed the references section appropriately.  The book mentioned does give the story of Matta.   DCI talk 22:23, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Here's why (as per talk page and notability guidelines):
 * No original research is needed; there are published sources that discuss Matta. Some of these are even available on the web.
 * The person about whom the article is written was fairly notable in his time. He was a (not so adept) military commander and political schemer, whose actions would have had potentially major effects.
 * The book used as the article's source, "A History of India, as Told By its Own Historians," is not a primary source.
 * On Talk:Matta (chief), the article's creator and main contributor explains that he needs a little time to improve the article.

Thanks,  DCI talk 23:50, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Delete : In-spite of the above facts I do not think Matta needs an article on it-self. There are many such persons whose name may appear in History of India, that does not mean each one qualifies for notability. The article of Matta can be added to Chach of Alor rather.Jethwarp (talk) 07:53, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I do understand your point, but believe that the article meets notability requirements. The author has stated on the talk page that he needs a little time to improve it, so let's give him some time and keep the article.  It doesn't harm the encyclopedia, at least in my eyes.   DCI talk 22:59, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that author has no more info to write on this page. Jethwarp (talk) 11:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes the general notability guideline with significant coverage in independent reliable sources found here. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:19, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Look, the article when nominated made a claim to notability, i.e., that he was a political leader.  The fact that the sole source did or didn't cite him doesn't mean the subject is not notable.  You have to nominate based on lack of notability by making an affirmative assertion that he's not notable, not that you have no idea.  If you have no idea, move on to nominating nonsense articles and vandalism and leave these to someone else to look at.--Milowent • hasspoken  01:46, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, my comment reads harsher than intended, i do get quite irritated when I see AfDs that I perceive shouldn't have happened.--Milowent • hasspoken 17:52, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Is his position as chief not equal to that of a mayor of a modern city?  D r e a m Focus  04:17, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG and the arguments above, a political title is of signifigant importance to this website. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 17:49, 3 November 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.