Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Safia Haleem


 * 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. Michig (talk) 08:48, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Safia Haleem

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not appear to be a notable academic. A search failed to find any significant coverage in reliable sources. However, as the subject of the article is from Pakistan, it is possible that sources might exist in Arabic and Urdu; if such sources are found, please ping me. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Total lack of notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:34, 8 December 2016 (UTC).
 * Delete as a clear delete for WP:AUTHOR and WP:PROF. SwisterTwister   talk  04:47, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Neutral/weak keep. (1) Formerly Head of the BBC Pashto Service - citation. Non-English sources seem more likely to be found in Pashto than in Arabic or Urdu. (2) Claims of academic importance seem to rest on this paper, written in collaboration with the two people who did the work. I don't think it adds anything to notability, which if there is any derives from her broadcasting career. Narky Blert (talk) 17:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I've found a suggestion (not WP:RS) that she was also involved in the BBC Dari language service, so that and Farsi are other possible languages where evidence might be found. Narky Blert (talk) 17:32, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   07:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of notability. Deathlibrarian (talk) 08:51, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - no authoritative references are provided. Nothing suggests particular notability.--Rpclod (talk) 21:36, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:PROF as she hasn't had multiple published papers that have been cited a lot, so she's hardly got any outstanding contributions in her field Seasider91 (talk) 22:28, 21 December 2016 (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.