Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talib Haider

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. So Why 10:42, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talib Haider

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

Not many WP:RS to verify his biography per WP:V. No major achievement. Fails WP:GNG and WP:JOURNALIST. Greenbörg (talk) 09:26, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:33, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:34, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:34, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. he's a news caster but i couldn't find anything in RS on him so he fails WP:GNG. --Saqib (talk) 10:31, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This link, in addition to this SBS interview confirms he is a broadcast journalist, commentator, and was a newscaster at Geo News, which is a major channel in Pakistan. Additionally, he appears to have worked for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Mar4d (talk) 13:30, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First source is not independent, the subject is affiliated with this organization.. second source doesn't discuss about him.. only having his opinion. and third source his self published. working for ABC doesn't make him notable. --Saqib (talk) 13:34, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 09:32, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 13:03, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- the sources are of insufficient depth, mostly soundbites and interviews. These types of sources are WP:SPIP rather than independent. BLPs deserve better than this. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:43, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no independent notability is established. Mainly WP:SPS. DrStrauss talk 08:10, 4 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.