Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abrar Hasan

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. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:25, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Abrar Hasan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable enough for an encyclopedic entry. Fails WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 06:47, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 07:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 07:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 07:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and maybe stubify. The subject appears notable under WP:GNG. The mentions of him in reliable sources are, for the most part, not trivial and directly relate to his role as a lawyer and bar association leader. By my count (and giving the benefit of the doubt for sources I'm not familiar with), there are at least five sources that (somewhat-)substantially cover him. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 23:00, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lawyers need substantial, indepth coverage, which is lacking for Hasan.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:07, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Kevin. samee ^talk 15:41, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It seems verifiable he was arrested and released due to protesting the removal of certain judges, and is of at least some importance. Leading up to the event, he was discussed significantly in this article on The Daily Times. He also seems notable enough that he was referred to by name in the title in the Daily Times article about his arrest, though 1,500 people were arrested. He gets 1 paragraph in The Nation about his arrest, and 2 paragraphs in The Independent about his release. I tried to improve his article by making sure the notable part is in the intro. I'm voting keep because that seems to just about pass WP:GNG, and per WP:NEXIST there are almost certainly more articles about him in his own language. Lonehexagon (talk) 01:13, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - enough sources to pass GNG. L293D (☎ • ✎) 15:58, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.