Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nabi Misdaq


 * 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. with no prejudice against speedy renomination (non-admin closure) czar ♔   01:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Nabi Misdaq

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a notable author. Writing a book on Afghan jokes translated into English will hardly bring notability. Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 21:08, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:34, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:34, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:35, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:35, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:35, 23 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. There are several pieces of information in the article that I would regard as more serious assertions of notability than the one mentioned by the nominator. Having said that, they don't exactly give strong grounds for keeping the article - but there's always the possibility of systemic bias when considering articles like these and, while I can't read it at all, the (presumably) Pashto Wikipedia article looks rather more substantial. Can anyone around look at it and report back? PWilkinson (talk) 12:36, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 10:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 10:40, 8 October 2014 (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.