Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quaiser Khalid

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) b uidhe 06:30, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quaiser Khalid

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article clearly fails WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. Fixing it would require deleting it and starting over. BonkHindrance (talk) 17:27, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. BonkHindrance (talk) 17:27, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yikes, looks like this article turned in to a hot mess since I approved it out of AfC a few years ago. I disagree with the assesment that the subject doesn't pass WP:GNG. Looks like he's got some news coverage and winning the Sahitya Academy Award (one of the highest literary honors in India) is alone probably enough. I don't think it needs to be rewritten. However, I am about to deep dive and slash and burn in hopes of avoiding sorched Earth Sulfurboy (talk) 17:39, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sulfurboy: Thank you! BonkHindrance (talk) 17:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So I've given the article quite the buzz cut so hopefully that's enough to alleviate pov concerns. I'm going to let other editors vote on this though since I hold an inherent bias from all the swamp draining and the fact that I originally approved it out of AfC in '17. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:06, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Looking at it now, NPOV would most likely make it a Stub. Best call would be delete. We will see soon. JAZHAZHANDZWIKI (talk) 17:59, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2020 February 29. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:52, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NASCARfan0548 ↗ 02:36, 16 March 2020 (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.