Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Qasim Sadiq


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 13:06, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Muhammad Qasim Sadiq

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has remained unsourced for two years. Nobody cares for it, and the individuals notability and even existence are questionable. MezzoMezzo (talk) 09:18, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. There is plenty of info in the internet, and for instance I sourced the death date from this website, but I have not a slightest idea how reliable this source is. I could not find any 100%-reliable source easily.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep.AFD Prod is not needed.Notability is here.We should assume good faith and try to improve the Articles.Msoamu (talk) 13:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. Well, that's my issue. We have one source of whose reliability is in question, and another which simply mentions where his body was buried. The article has existed based on good faith for over two years and nobody has tried to improve it. What is the cutoff point? MezzoMezzo (talk) 13:40, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:40, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:40, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:40, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - I just added {WP Biography}{WP Islam}{WP Pakistan}. AfDs don't show up on Project pages if no tags exist. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:54, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Aside from notability being apparent, there is a seriously flawed deletion rationaile being advanced by the nominator. WP:NOEFFORT is not a reason to delete. The article does need work by those knowledgable on the subject matter, but AfD is not for cleanup. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:40, 23 February 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.