Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Begum

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 speedy delete under criteria G11/G12. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:51, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Begum (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)

Procedural nomination on behalf of an editor who apparently cannot start this page themselves. The rationale is: The article for Sarah Begum should be deleted. It is clearly promotional in tone, the majority of statements are supported by two sources that are not reliable and those sources are what support any claims to pass GNG. Thanks Battleofalma (talk) 11:34, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Reyk _YO! 11:53, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 13:20, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 13:20, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 13:20, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Gameinfirmary (talk) 13:20, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails the GNG. Author indeffed recently for serial copyvios. ^Thanks, L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 14:35, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, this one is a 63% copyvio as well, and it's also promotional copy so is a case of WP:PROMO (have added csd nomination). Also, it's mainly referenced to unreliable sources Atlantic306 (talk) 16:52, 6 August 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.