Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jocelyn Ortt-Saeed

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 keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) LibStar (talk) 01:45, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jocelyn Ortt-Saeed

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE as a poet. Gnews comes up with 3 hits and passing mentions. No major awards won and an orphan article. LibStar (talk) 23:46, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ortt-Saeed was the subject of the documentary film Punjabi Love Story. Not sure what parameters were used for the Google News search, but it seems to have missed more substantial coverage in The Express Tribune, Our Heritage magazine and The Sydney Morning Herald. She is listed in World Who's Who and the International Who's Who in Poetry. --Canley (talk) 05:25, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Expanded the article with notable information provided above by Canley and improved the sourcing. At its current state, I believe the subject satisfies WP:POET --WomenProj (talk) 17:11, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Recent improvements made to the article after the above nomination are noteworthy.Ngrewal1 (talk) 00:06, 4 November 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.