Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salman Ghani (2nd nomination)


 * 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. If a well established editor in good standing wishes to recreate a past incarnation of this page they can contact me for userfication of an older version J04n(talk page) 19:19, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Salman Ghani
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

i am unable to find coverage in the RS on the subject. this BLP looks dubious to me which contains OR which is promotional in tone. I just hope this is not a hoax article which have been here since 2010. Saqib (talk) 16:01, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Much of what is written in the article is absolute OR and falls foul of our WP:BLP policy. While the man has been named in the Paradise Papers imbroglio, there is nothing significant for the subject to pass WP:GNG or WP:BIO. On pure BLP grounds, this article should be speedy deleted.  Lourdes  16:23, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * My guess is that all these 3 sources which you listed took the information from this Wikipedia page. --Saqib (talk) 16:27, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:30, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:30, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 8 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment. Before 2 October 2017, this article was about the former Commerce Secretary of Pakistan . A new editor apparently repurposed the page. • Gene93k (talk) 16:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * And in May 2016, the page was about doctor . And in 2010, it was about a journalist . I don't think any of the Usman Ghani is notable enough to warrant a bio. --Saqib (talk) 16:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The commerce secretary is likely notable per WP:POLITICIAN.  overwrote the original article about the talk show host for that reason. • Gene93k (talk) 16:45, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes. Cabinet ministers, at least of major departments in major countries, are normally notable, though I think it may not be a formal guideline. But then we will need additional pages, because I think this businessman is also likely to be notable.  DGG ( talk ) 17:29, 8 November 2017 (UTC)`
 * My opinion is that this Afd discussion is based on the contents of the current article, not past or new individuals who may probably qualify as notable. As the current article stands, it is a straightforward WP:BLP violation, an attempt to create an ATTACK page, and should be WP:TNT'd and deleted asap. For example:
 * The following line is mentioned in the article: Ghani is considered as a liberal and extremely cunning in his business practices, according to Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa "to think that he is defined by religiosity and traditionalism, however, would be a mistake". This is a straight out deliberate false claim placed to attack the subject. The purported Ayesha Siddiqa made this statement with respect to another person known as Malik Riaz Hussain in a blogpost on a Wikipedia blacklisted site Kafila online (a copy of the post can be found here). The exact statement read in context is as follows: [...]Hussain has a good understanding of the values and religiosity of the middle and lower-middle classes, which the more traditional elite is alienated from. To think that he is defined by religiosity and traditionalism, however, would be a mistake.
 * Not one of the sources mentioned within the article contain the subject's name. The article cites another Wikipedia article List of Pakistanis by net worth to support the claim of Salman Ghani's net worth. No surprises that the same editor who is editing this article has added the details in that list, using another source which does not contain the subject's name.
 * It is clear that the attempt here has been to defame and attack the subject than anything else. This is grossly damaging to any living person. One alternative is that all the intermediate revisions containing the derogatory unreferenced (and falsely referenced) material should be rev-deleted. Policy combined with common-sense would dictate that we first move to protect the subject from any possible BLP violation and delete the article. I recommend that anyone who wishes to realign the article to any new/previous biography or even to re-create the current biography is free to do the same once the article is deleted. Thanks.  Lourdes  02:18, 9 November 2017 (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.