Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Md Muhsin Alam


 * 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 no consensus. The discussion has been significantly disrupted by suspicious COI editors and now-blocked users, but even excluding this participation there seems to be good-faith disagreement from established users as to whether this individual is technically notable. ~ mazca  talk 14:08, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Md Muhsin Alam

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Commander of Para Commando Brigade, Fails WP:MILPERSON. Per WP:MILPERSON, Generally two levels above a squadron e.g commander of a division can be considered notable. Didn't receive any highest award. No significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject (only passing mention). আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 20:29, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:59, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:59, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

As per normal notability protocol, a Division commander is "generally" notable. This subject formation is an independent special forces brigade that is directly under command of Chief of Army Staff and used as an Army strategic reserve. Being important as such, Commander of this special forces formation is "Warrant A" holder, that puts him at par to a conventional Division commander who is "generally" notable.User:tahmid8440
 * , You clearly have WP:COI here. Otherwise there is no way you can get this type of image. Please WP:disclose your connection. Also please provide sources that are significant coverage & independent of the subject (not just some passing mention). --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 02:08, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

I have no problem if community thinks this article should be kept. However, it looks like WP:Canvassing is going on here, above two account was inactive & suddenly they logged in & vote's here. --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 20:35, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, Not notable, There's a bunch of references in the article but not a single one covers him (saw the title). Google search only returns some other peoples image, web section returns also others sometimes holding the name in a list. I fear that the article might fail GNG. —  A. Shohag (pingme or Talk) 04:10, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 04:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. As a general officer clearly does pass WP:SOLDIER #2. Therefore the entire nomination is effectively invalid as it is based on an incorrect assumption. Generally two levels above a squadron e.g commander of a division can be considered notable has no basis in any notability guideline. In any case, two levels above a squadron is, in fact, a brigade! -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:51, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Necrothesp as usual you portray WP:SOLDIER as a guideline when it is just an Essay. Just being a general officer does not establish Notability. Mztourist (talk) 03:05, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If it's not valid it's strange how you cited this article as failing it. Even though it clearly doesn't. It isn't a guideline, but it is a standard for notability of military biographies widely accepted by editors (with a few exceptions, of course, of which you are one of the most vocal). I would point you once again to this list establishing the existence of consensus among editors. We both know we have differing points of view and that you don't accept the validity of WP:SOLDIER or the clear consensus to keep officers of this rank. Is there really any need to have this discussion on every single AfD discussion about a senior military officer? -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:22, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The list that you made? The list that shows that people think that SOLDIER is a guideline when its not? That list? Yet again you say that I don't accept the validity of SOLDIER, which is irrelevant. SOLDIER an Essay, which is clearly subject to WP:GNG, so if there isn't SIGCOV in multiple RS, even if someone meets one of the criteria they don't deserve a page. Mztourist (talk) 04:46, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:ONLYESSAY. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:44, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, so because I made the list and I don't agree with you it's not valid? Are you maybe suggesting I left off AfDs that didn't agree with me and thereby challenging my integrity? I can assure you that I did not. I made a thorough search and included every relevant AfD I could find. Then you apparently challenge consensus because it was made by people who don't agree with you! Can you not see how it might look like you think your opinion is valid and other editors' differing opinions are not? -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:35, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Given your continued mischaracertisaton of WP:SOLDIER and ignoring of the discussion that led to it: [], I don't see that anyone should pay any notice to your list. Mztourist (talk) 12:27, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * So you are questioning my integrity. Glad we got that (and your attitude towards those who disagree with you) straight. But I would point out that I have not mischaracterised WP:SOLDIER in any way and that the discussion you keep citing is irrelevant as to the consensus established over years at AfD (even though you won't accept it as the evidence has been compiled by an editor who disagrees with you, and in any case most of the editors who participated in those discussions are apparently wrong). -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:41, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The claimed consensus is based on the misunderstanding among many Users that WP:SOLDIER is a guideline and that just meeting one of the 6 criteria automatically establishes notability absent SIGCOV in multiple RS. The discussion leading to SOLDIER is not irrelevant, it goes to the heart of what SOLDIER was intended to achieve. Otherwise why else would it be specifically referenced at the top of SOLDIER?. Its clear that you like pages about non-notable one-Stars and will claim SOLDIER is a guideline or point to your list to try to justify their retention.Mztourist (talk) 03:09, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Once again, you simply seem to be using the "I'm right and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong and/or misguided" argument. Which last time I looked wasn't valid. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:45, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Once again, you can't justify your position wrt the background to SOLDIER and so just start throwing baseless accusations. Mztourist (talk) 07:12, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I suppose it's possible that other cultures use words like "blessed" when describing and individual with a child, however, the tone of the article seems like a possible "COI" or, at the very least, presents a non-neutral POV. I'm not from Bangladesh so I won't !vote because I do believe GNG should be applied regionally and even locally when evidence can be provided. --Tsistunagiska (talk) 15:41, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * A badly written article does not equate to a non-notable topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:03, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - per WP:SOLDIER and WP:PEOPLEOUTCOMES, notable subject as a general officer. -- Zayeem  (talk) 17:10, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - regardless of claims that "it's only an essay" the fact is that it is long-established consensus that being a general officer makes a person notable. Also I can't help but doubt that there would be much call to delete the page of a one-star officer in a first- or second-world military force. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:44, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * User:The Bushranger test that supposed consensus at MILHIST as you will find a great divergence of opinions as to whether or not "being a general officer makes a person notable." and you should also read/reread the discussion that led to WP:SOLDIER: [] Mztourist (talk) 10:12, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - The subject passes WP:SOLDIER. Serankail (talk) 21:20, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Blocked for spamming, likely WP:UPE. MER-C 14:45, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - "Brigadier General is a one star GENERAL according to Commonwealth country military policy (https://www.thefreedictionary.com/One-star+general) and (https://www.britannica.com/topic/general). Asifuzzaman11 (talk) 16:40, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I share your concerns and also regarding Billyshudson below. Mztourist (talk) 07:14, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep- Different countries have different ranking, I agree with Asifuzzaman11, he passes WP:SOLDIER.Billyshudson (talk) 21:10, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Blocked for spamming, likely WP:UPE. MER-C 14:36, 7 November 2020 (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.