Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Nur Alam 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 delete. Daniel (talk) 03:55, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Nur Alam Chowdhury (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable union politician (Unions are the smallest rural administrative and local government units in Bangladesh), fails WP:POLITICIAN. Doesn’t received significant press coverage. Best Chairman isn’t notable award. Meeting with a high commissioner doesn’t make someone notable. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 02:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just because someone is a Union politician doesn't mean they are non-notable. For many countries, there are Wiki pages for notable local community leaders and councillors, especially if they have had a great impact. You are also incorrect, Unions are not the smallest rural administrative and local government units in Bangladesh, they are further divided into Wards (and then villages). SalamAlayka (talk) 15:01, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Usually local politicians like Union politician aren't notable, see WP:POLOUTCOMES. How he was notable, What kind of great impact he had? Show us with WP:RS please. --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 17:20, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete politicians at the local level are gnerally not notable. We have a lot of crufty articles at this level that need to go but have not. We should not allow the fact that we poorly regulate the creation of articles on this level and fail to enforce our own guidelines justify keeping articles on clearly non-notable people at this level and further ignoring our own guidelines. Wikipedia is still paying for the original sins of the 2001-2006 time period and having virtually no limits to what sort of articles were created. For example earlier today I nominated for deletion an article that had existed since 2005 and has 0 sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:52, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This person is genuinely notable. He is not only a local politician, but a nationally awarded one and was also director of banks, boards and many other organisations. He is a historical figure.SalamAlayka (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I already said Best Chairman isn’t notable award. And bank may be notable but no, director of bank isn’t automatically notable. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk)

• Delete. Local politicians are not notable.~Yahya (✉) • 19:02, 15 January 2021 (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.