Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fakhrul Islam

Fakhrul Islam

Fakhrul Islam (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)

Non-notable politician, never gained office and is known only for getting shot. Ansh666 23:54, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't claim to have done adequate WP:BEFORE work (although I did some), so I'll now say Merge/Redirect into the below target. Ansh666 19:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

• Delete: Fails WP:POLITICIAN, WP:ONEEVENT. Ravenswing 06:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
• Delete: fails WP:POLITICIAN. Also, someone is surely not notable for a single event, especially if it is just their death. Never held office, too. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 20:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
• Keep - Well, I hate to dissent, but I feel that this would rise to a little more than WP:ONEEVENT. While the assassination seems to be what it prominent in the news right now, there are sources that state that he was the leader of Muttahida Qaumi Movement.[1] While much of the press is about the assassination, this is big news in his country. It is also a political assassination, not just an ordinary murder that people often try to spam Wikipedia with. It is also now reported that the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, the rival political party, claimed responsibility for the attack which make this a little more than just an assassination, but what can be considered a terrorist attack as it was carried out by a terrorist organization (the Taliban). Criterion #2 of WP:POLITICIAN states "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage" is a criterion for notability. Although he was only running for political office, he is still a "major local political figure" where he was from and received press associated with such. According to this article, he was a target of planned assassinations by the Taliban. I look at this as a "political assassination carried out by a terrorist organization" (my words) as opposed to a politician "known only for getting shot" (words of nominator). So, my opinion is to keep the article or alternatively create an article for Assassination of Fakhrul Islam or Assassination of Pakistan Provincial Assembly Candidates in 2013 or something similar. Finally, if this does end up with a delete consensus, it should be redirected anyway. WP:POLITICIAN states "the general rule is to redirect to an appropriate page covering the election or political office sought in lieu of deletion." As such, either a redirect or delete consensus should be redirected to Muttahida Qaumi Movement, Member of the Provincial Assembly, or something similar.--FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 15:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
  • There's a section (Pakistani general election, 2013#Violence) which could serve as a redirect target. Ansh666 17:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Assuming redirect, this would be my article of choice. We could add the information into that section and redirect accordingly. Good Find!! --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 18:30, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
  • The source quoted starts with "A Muttahida Qaumi Movement leader," not THE leader, and that's ONE source, not "sources." His alleged leadership notwithstanding, he doesn't appear anywhere in the rather extensive, and heavily sourced, Muttahida Qaumi Movement article. I don't have objections myself to a redirect, but perhaps the opinion of those editors who've been maintaining the MQM article should be solicited. Ravenswing 20:24, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
  • You bring up a good point about MQM editors. My contention is based on him being a "major local" political figure. Would it be considered WP:CAN to solicit an opinion from those working in WP:PAK?--FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 22:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)