Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mir Mahmud Khan II


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:49, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Mir Mahmud Khan II

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not sure how reliable the source is. WikiEditCrunch (talk) 09:28, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. --  Ascii002  ( talk  ·  contribs  ·  guestbook ) 12:02, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. --  Ascii002  ( talk  ·  contribs  ·  guestbook ) 12:02, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. The  19th century Imperial Gazetteer of India may not be a reliable source for interpretation ofIndian re civilization, but it is certainly good enough to establish who was the ruler of a particualr Indian prinely state, and people in such positions are notable. Multiple other histories are of courseavailable, and nominating this without checking is not helpful.   DGG ( talk ) 21:12, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 06:17, 21 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - I agree with with - this type of person is notable enough to be included. I added some info and a reference to another RS.--Lemnaminor (talk) 15:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 02:56, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep: notable ruler. Certainly needs more sources but the proof of his position establishes notability. More sources are likely to be available in local print. Most credible Pakistani sources have not yet made it to the internet. -- lTopGunl (talk) 18:47, 1 December 2015 (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.