Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mehdi Kazemi


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 16:38, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Mehdi Kazemi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a WP:1E of an immigration dossier. The person is not notable and there is no claim of notability in the article. Farhikht (talk) 17:36, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep though I wouldnt at all object to moving the article to a different non biographical name it seems the case has been notable, and is ref'd. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 21:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Why can't the article be moved to Asylum case of Mehdi Kazemi? I don't see a move button.. Seems the case has received substantial coverage in reliable independent sources? Candleabracadabra (talk) 22:18, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete -- There are 100,000s of asylum claims. 1000s of them are accepted.  Because homosexuality is persecuted in certain countries, that is a ground for asylum, and there are probably 100s of which cases.  What makes this case unique enough to be notable.  Apart from his sexuality, I see nothing notable.  Peterkingiron (talk) 11:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * An admin could move it. If you want that to happen, Candleabracadabra, I suggest you vote to keep. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 23:50, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:21, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Keep High profile case (see here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/a-life-or-death-decision-792058.html). Worth keeping. Kabirat (talk) 12:04, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 18:03, 19 July 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.