Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nyla Ali Khan


 * 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. Sourcing has certainly been improved during the course of the debate, but there's limited agreement as to whether enough notability has been demonstrated. ~ mazca  talk 12:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Nyla Ali Khan

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unreferenced BLP Dawnseeker2000   19:20, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - There were some sources, just not properly formatted, which I tweaked. Even so, the article still has multiple issues, but they can probably also be fixed with a bit more effort. A larger issue is that the subject's professional notability seems to be only marginal at this time. However, her status as a female Muslim who is also an academic, scholar, activist and author seems unique enough to grant her a certain personal notability. Doc  Tropics  22:24, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. GS cites are 4, 1, 1. Academic in early career. Does not yet approach standards of notability expected here. Xxanthippe (talk) 07:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  —Msrasnw (talk) 00:36, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of evidence of passing WP:GNG and WP:PROF, Doc Tropics' special pleading notwithstanding. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: I think the description of her on the University of Nebraska Kearney site as “a feminist-activist-scholar,” might more more appropriate than standard academic view - and the article is in my view a little over-promotional. My keep is based on
 * * her published books and their reviews,
 * * her two interviews in Epilogue magazine - November 2009 Vol 3 Issue 12 p 38-41-30 http://issuu.com/epilogue/docs/epilogue-november-2009 and December 2009 Vol 3 Issue 12 p 27-30 and
 * * her picture and quote from her on the front of the same magazine Issue 2 Volume 4 2010. (A little picture and quote seems clearly indicative that the magazine finds her notable)
 * Our coverage of the studies of role of gender in Kasmir is as yet not too strong and would be a shame to loose this. The interview in the magazine is referenced at the moment to a blog but my references here - which I have added to the article = are to the magazine proper - but I had a little difficulty accessing the pages as I have some difficulties viewing some kinds of pages. Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 10:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC))


 * comment - Since the article was first nominated for AfD several editors have acted to expand the content and add references. While the subject may not yet have achieved professional notability, it does seem that her personal notability as a Muslim feminist from Kashmir is more clear. Doc  Tropics  15:44, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, if some more sources can be added, I would recommend keeping. It is week but there does seem to be notability. Having contributed to encyclopedias, published academic papers, and written books, the cumulutive effect seems to be minor notability.Willbennett2007 (talk) 22:04, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep published author. Dramedy Tonight (talk) 10:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That is not a valid keep rationale. Ironholds (talk) 10:38, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Being published by a credible publisher makes her notable. Dramedy Tonight (talk) 10:50, 21 August 2010 (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.