Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raes Jamil Bhurgari


 * 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. (non-admin closure) — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 21:20, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Raes Jamil Bhurgari

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Deceased politician who is only mentioned in an obituary. Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. AviationFreak 💬 21:07, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. AviationFreak 💬 21:07, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment., how does this fail WP:NPOL? I agree the sourcing could be better, but Bhurgari served as a member of a provincial legislature. WP:NPOL clearly states that members of provincial legislatures are indeed notable. Lefcentreright  Discuss   21:18, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean, but the bit stating that on the WP:NPOL section has a footnote that calls serving in a regional legislative body a "secondary criterion." Furthermore, the only source on the article states that Bhurgari "barely attended any meetings" while in office. I would still argue that Bhurgari is not notable. AviationFreak 💬 22:03, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That same note also says that in this subject area, completeness is the most important consideration. The actual rule is that as long as it's possible to verify that the person actually held the claimed office and isn't a hoax, deletion is off the table forever regardless of any sourcing problems, except maybe in rare extenuating circumstances (e.g. the person won the election and then died the very next day and thus was never actually sworn into office at all) that haven't been demonstrated here. We also have a terrible habit of writing bad articles about politicians, which say little more than "Person is a politician who held office from [Year] to [Year], the end" — not because improvement is impossible, but because we don't necessarily always put in the work to make the improvements. (And we have an especially serious problem when it comes to politicians in countries where the bulk of the potential sourcing is likely to be in a foreign language that many Wikipedians cannot read, meaning we'll miss even more possible sources than we already do for anglos.) Also, the source says he rarely attended committee meetings, not that he never attended sittings of the legislature. Those aren't the same thing. Bearcat (talk) 19:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:NPOL, including the footnote referenced above which says "this criterion ensures that our coverage of major political offices, incorporating all of the present and past holders of that office, will be complete regardless". No convincing argument has been made as to why this should be an exception (and the only exception I have ever seen) to our general practice in this area. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NPOL. An individual becomes notable once they are elected or appointed to a provisional legislature. --Enos733 (talk) 20:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable because of office.  Wiki Macaroons Cinnamon? 09:02, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yes, the article needs referencing improvement; however, the provincial legislature of Sindh is the legislature of a province of Pakistan, and thus a role that straight up passes NPOL #1. Bearcat (talk) 19:02, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2020 (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.