Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saad Rasool


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 07:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Saad Rasool

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

AfD: Nominated for deletion - Fails WP:Notability — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egopearl (talk • contribs)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Not technically a "re"list--discussion page was created without afd2 template or transclusion to daily log. Fixed.
 * This article does not fail notability. There are only a few sane voices in a country in Pakistan.  And Saad is a prominent voice in this regard.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghazi5 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The articles fails notability because the sources consist merely of his articles. He may be a lawyer and may have gone to Harvard but that alone is not enough to make the subject notable. Therefore the article fails notability. 42.83.84.218 (talk) 09:27, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Most of the references are either  about the subject's cases, with the lawyer himself a very subsidiary consideration, or pure PR about them . Newspapers are not imune to the publication of PR.  DGG ( talk ) 00:52, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep-This lawyer and journalist's notability is established through his outspoken advocacy in Pakistan on important issues, like acid attacks on women, which have been written about in independent sources, like BBC here (“Sahad Rasool, a lawyer working on a new law to criminalize acid attacks.”) and the Pakistan Express Tribune/ Int'l New York Times here "Advocate Saad Rasool said the Act would help treat acid or burn incidents not only as a crime but as a social issue.”   Some, but not all, of the  sources listed here are articles written by him, making it not so easy to identify primary sources from independent ones.       ABF99 (talk) 05:22, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Finngall  talk  19:26, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Totally run of the mill as a lawyer, he literally does not even have a single factor of my standards for attorneys. Completely lacking in reliable sources, this stub can not be turned into an article. Harvard is the largest law school in the United States; merely getting an Ll.M. (even if it were true?) does not make one automatically notable. While his major cause is worthy, we are not a soapbox, nor are we a webhost service for charitable causes. He completely fails the prof test. Bearian (talk) 15:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:09, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:09, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:09, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:09, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:09, 1 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete nn.  sami  talk 05:29, 2 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.