Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sutish Anand Sharma

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:10, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Sutish Anand Sharma

Sutish Anand Sharma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Speculative negative BLP of the alleged 'terrorist'. No follow-up news about this person from the Pak government (unlike in the case of Ajmal Kasab). Another pro-taliban group took the responsibility of the Lahore attack so the accusations were clearly false. I suggest this article be deleted: faint notability + BLP issues = delete. Capricorn42^Talk 02:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete Overly speculative, unverifiable, and a hint of propoganda as well LetsdrinkTea 02:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete when important WP:BLP issues are weighed against the slight chance that a person is notable, BLP wins. ThemFromSpace 04:51, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep. Delete. There are a number of sources, and they seem reliable. Just because Ansar Wa Mohajir took responsibility doesn't meant that Sharma didn't do it; he could have been a member. Or Ansar might not have actually been behind it; source #2 mentions some discrepancies between Ansar's claim and actual fact. Notability is not temporary. I believe that these sources are enough to make Sharma notable, even if there was no later coverage. The policies pointed out by Capricorn42 make this a clear delete.Theymos (talk) 05:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

This person came into light only due to the bomb blast accusations by the Pakistan government; the media quoted what the government said, and then the whole issue went into a state of silence—no legal proceeding, nothing. Perhaps a sourced paragraph about the allegations in the Lahore bomb blast article (if exists) is fine; but IMO, writing a whole BLP based on a frivolous accusation is an overkill. (see Wikipedia:Avoiding_harm#Pseudo-biographies)Capricorn42^Talk 05:49, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete per Nom and subsequent valid WP:ONEEVENT arguments --ClubOranje^T 09:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete, per WP:BLP1E. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:11, 28 March 2009 (UTC).

*Delete, per nom and above. One event. Deletion Mutation 15:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC) N.B. !vote of sockpuppet of blocked user struck through. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. --Docku: What's up? 18:22, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

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.