Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Ali Naqvi

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.  Sandstein  09:21, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Ali Naqvi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No in-depth coverage found. Fails WP:GNG. Greenbörg (talk) 09:28, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:09, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:09, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. While an article might be acceptable here if it could be reliably sourced well enough to clear WP:GNG, that's not what the sources here are doing — as written, this is resting entirely on one primary source and one glancing namecheck of his existence on one page of one book. That's not enough. The potential notability claim here took place long enough ago that valid sourcing for it would not be expected to show up on a simple Google search. Better sources might exist in microfilms or archives, certainly, but we don't keep poorly sourced articles just because better sources might exist — we keep poorly sourced articles only if and when somebody does the work to demonstrate that better sources do exist. Bearcat (talk) 18:00, 10 August 2017 (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.