Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raja Adalat 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 delete. Drmies (talk) 03:06, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Raja Adalat Khan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is an unsourced stub about a person. I BLPPRODded it but the creator claims the person is dead and so removed the tag. Of course, there's no source for that, either. His supposed medals and family connections do not make him notable. I'm not sure if his supposed rank would, but it's unsourced. The "Sherlock Holmes of Balochistan" is unsourced and sounds dubious. Was previously illustrated but image was deleted as a copyvio. IN SHORT: no evidence of notability. BethNaught (talk) 19:36, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Nor, for that matter, of actually being true. BethNaught (talk) 21:47, 12 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Likely delete as I'm not seeing any signs of improvement and my searches particularly Books found results for other people including an agriculturist. SwisterTwister   talk  20:44, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep, please visit SUPPLEMENT TO THE LONDON GAZETTE, 1 JANUARY, 1918 page 86. It contains the required citation and hope you guys will be satisfied. And next time please mention your concern on article talk page rather than moving the article straight for deletion. Thanks.Wikibaba1977 (talk) 04:46, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment As for supposed medal, Notability and significance of madel please visit thae above mentioned link and Queen's Police Medal( prior to 1940 it was called Kings police madel). Also please refer to clause of General notability guideline Notability


 * "Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.
 * "Sources" should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected. Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability.


 * Also please refer to Responsibility for providing citations in Verifiability

consider adding a citation needed tag as an interim step. When tagging or removing material for lacking an inline citation, please state your concern that there may not be a published reliable source for the content, and therefore it may not be verifiable.


 * Wikibaba1977 (talk) 05:30, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The London Gazette source is a one-line mention and does not establish notability. I have been unable to access the journal article but since you only quote one page I don't think that alone would support notability. Also, stop claiming I'm misbehaving by not asking for citations first. The WP:BURDEN is on you and you alone to source everything you write. BethNaught (talk) 07:38, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment The one line says it all, Its queens/Kings police madel just like victoria cross, not some any other madel. The recipients of these madels are cosidered notable, thats why they are given this madel. I didnt said anything that you misbehaved with me. Read my comments again and also read the above mentioned guidelines also. please see Queen's Police Medal.Wikibaba1977 (talk) 09:20, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:ANYBIO States that someone who has received a well-known award is likely to be notable. If you look at Template:Decorations of the United Kingdom the QPM is actually two levels below the Victoria Cross, so whether this satisfies ANYBIO needs more discussion. I'm not sure if a VC makes you notable anyway.
 * Procedural note: there is no need to copy out the guidelines. We have the intelligence to click on links. Copy-pasting large chunks of text gives rise to WP:WALLS which make people less interested in reading your argument. Moreover, it's spelt "medal" not "madel": I'm surprised you didn't notice that given you link to pages with that word in the title. BethNaught (talk) 09:56, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment looking at your behavior i must say you are in violation of WP:NPOV. I pasted the guidelines for people like you who think they have the intelligence but don't use it to their advantage. If you had read the guidelines in the first place then you might have added refimprove or unreferenced instead of just tagging it for deletion. As for Notability you your self has pointed out that WP:ANYBIO States that someone who has received a well-known award is likely to be notable. I can also point out your grammar mistakes like comma etc but i will not because English is not my mother tongue and this is not the right forum for this type of discussion. My advice try to avoid this type of silly discussion in future.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikibaba1977 (talk • contribs) 04:41, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment As already related above according to WP:ANYBIO States that someone who has received a well-known award is likely to be notable. also please refer to Category:Dead people in the present context.Wikibaba1977 (talk) 05:57, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:10, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 25 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Junior police officer. The King's (or Queen's) Police Medal is nowhere near high enough for any form of inherent notability. Suggesting it's anywhere near the Victoria Cross is laughable. Nearly 100 KPMs were awarded in that half-yearly honours list alone (about half of them to Indian police officers) and this was quite common. It was primarily a medal to recognise long service, although it was sometimes awarded for acts of gallantry as well. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:37, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not meet WP:GNG, no significant coverage. The King's Police Medal does not denote the type of notability that is needed for inclusion on Wikipedia. Perhaps it imparted local notability, but not encyclopedic notability. EricSerge (talk) 14:42, 25 September 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.