Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tapan Chowdhury


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 15:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Tapan Chowdhury

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  AfD statistics)

Unsourced biography of a living person Smileupper09 (talk) 01:03, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  —Smileupper09 (talk) 01:03, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep: per Notability_(people) (first level national office holder). Subject was an adviser (Energy and Power ministry) of the 2007 Caretaker Government of Bangladesh. An advisor in a caretaker government is the same rank as cabinet ministers. Subject had significant press coverage in the last few years. (BBC News, Daily Star,etc.). --Ragib (talk) 01:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 18 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - How an “adviser” of a “short term (3 months) government” for conducting election only can be a notable post? Even the subject had been sacked (they are requested to ‘resign’ generally) before he could complete his term. There had been many dozens “advisers” generated for the last 20 years in Bangladesh and I assume Wikipedia is not a directory/book-keeper for them.--Smileupper09 (talk) 03:02, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Ha ha, I would recommend that you petition for changing the constitution of Bangladesh to reflect your view points. Also, do ask for changing Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Per Wikipedia's notability guidelines on politicians, first level national office holders are notable. This "Adviser" is a formally defined post in the Caretaker government of Bangladesh, and is equivalent to a minister. But I'm sure you already know that. --Ragib (talk) 03:21, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per Ragib. I would also like to stress a previous comment raised on Smileupper09's talk page (check edit history for deleted commentary). --Soman (talk) 09:26, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Michael Jackson and Look alike Michael Jackson are not the same things. Similarly, a True Minister and "3 months minister level adviser” are not the same things too. Hope Wikipedia Guidelines for Notability are able to differentiate the matter.--Smileupper09 (talk) 06:07, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry to say this, but what you said above is patent nonsense. This is a constitutionally defined position with full rank similarity (and in protocol as well) as a full minister. I suggest that you take the time to read up the Constitution of Bangladesh, especially Part 4, Chapter IIA, Article 58C-11, which clearly states: The Chief Adviser shall have the status, and shall be entitled to the remuneration and privileges, of a Prime Minister and an Adviser shall have the status, and shall be entitled to the remuneration and privileges, of a Minister. If you have any problem with the constitution, perhaps you can take it up at the parliament. Also, please do not make me repeat the notability guideline on first level national office holders, which I've cited twice above. Thank you. --Ragib (talk) 06:23, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh please... Wikipedia is not beholden to the constitution of Pakistan, there is no need to bend notabilty requirements to fit. Hairhorn (talk) 15:44, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Even without the government position the Google News search linked above finds extensive coverage of the subject's business career. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: I've pruned text that was a clear copyright violation. The text was copied from here. Mind  matrix  14:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - I assume the last One reference, in fact One-Fourth reference about the "adviser" or businessman is not sufficient to establish his notability. Because the BBC page was about the news of Four failure "advisers" who had been sacked by the government of Bangladesh.--Smileupper09 (talk) 05:57, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep - the advisor stuff is pretty borderline. In this case, however, his business stuff would appear to satisfy (relatively) the amount of coverage needed to meet GNG.   Cocytus   [»talk«]  02:41, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Most of the subject's notability stems from only a few month period during which he held a semi-important position.-- Pink Bull  04:02, 24 December 2009 (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.