Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghulam Rasool Saeedi

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Ghulam Rasool Saeedi}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Ghulam Rasool Saeedi}})

So earlier today, I moved this bio to the draft NS because I didn't find the subject WP:N enough. However, the creator {{u|Youknowwhoistheman}} moved it back to the main NS without any discussion. So, I think it's reasonable to nom. it for deletion. From what I can tell, the subject doesn't meet WP:GNG or even AUTHOR. Plus, [https://www.dawn.com/news/1316065 this piece] is just a Letter to the editor, so one should simply ignore it when establishing GNG. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: Thanks for noticing, I think that before putting any new article in draft, it should be given time. So that it can be properly prepared. You put it in draft in a very short time without thinking. Secondly, always try to improve an article before putting it on deletion, rather than nominating it for deletion.

Now coming to the point, is this article really not passing the general notability of Wikipedia, WP:GNG? So, I think you should have done a little more in-depth study. If you search his name in Urdu and English, you will find mention of him in hundreds of books. And there are hundreds of books in which he is mentioned, but he has not come in the world of internet. Which is absolutely right according to Wikipedia policy, for more information you can read WP:Offline.

Yes, it definitely seems to me that the way you put the article in draft in a hurry, it seems as if you have some personal enmity with him.

Thanks, take care! Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 15:44, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

• Youknowwhoistheman, It's strange that everyone thinks I have some sort of agenda or personal enmity with them. Rest assured, I don't have any personal issues with the subject. He's deceased—may he RIP. Tbh, I didn't want to nominate this for deletion. I wanted to give this bio a chance, which is why I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ghulam_Rasool_Saeedi&diff=prev&oldid=1226236442 draftified it] instead of AfD'g it. However, you [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ghulam_Rasool_Saeedi&diff=prev&oldid=1226239812 moved it back to the main NS] - leaving me no other option but to bring it here. So you need to avoid WP:ATA and prove that he either meets GNG or AUTHOR. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
• :Yeah sure, it is left to other editors to decide. again, thanks you! Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 16:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

* Keep. Meets Wikipedia's notability standards. There is an entry about this person in The Pakistan National Bibliography book from 1975 -- having a subject listed in a national book of biographies is always a good indicator of notability. Second, a Google Scholar search [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C36&q=%22ghulam+rasool+saeedi%22&btnG= turns up his name referenced in a number of works]. Finally, the citations provided in the article appear to be solid overall and support notability. --SouthernNights (talk) 20:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per SouthernNights. WP:BEFORE was not done properly. A simple search in Urdu newspapers brings a lot of coverage: [https://jang.com.pk/news/56775], [https://jang.com.pk/news/48185]. Meets WP:NSCHOLAR. Bad nomination which should be withdrawn asap. 2A00:23C6:139B:A101:78CA:7B5:3148:9172 (talk) 00:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.