Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atif Khalid Butt

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. Wizardman 15:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Atif Khalid Butt

Twice speedied under A7, insufficient assertion of notability, authored by a user (User:Atifk.butt) whose name bears a suspicious resemblance to the subject. Skomorokh 13:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:COI Richard75 (talk) 13:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt - WP:COI, no content, unreferenced, non-notable. Blaxthos ( t / c ) 13:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - totally not notable - just some guy. Dreamspy (talk) 15:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Butt No One comes every day. Gnninnnggh Plutonium27 (talk) 15:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- The article definitely needs sources. Its author may not have made some grammatical errors that suggest he or she is not a native speaker of English. But I think the author should be offered the assumption of good faith. I think the suggestion of salting is premature. I think the potential exists that the author may been prevented from making a better case in the article. The article was nominated for deletion less than ten minutes after creation -- generally a bad sign in my judgment.

If Atif Butt had published one or more notable books, then they would merit coverage here, even if that book(s) was not published in English, correct? Similarly, if they had translated one or more notable English language books into Urdu, would not that too establish the value in covering him or her on the wikipedia? Geo Swan (talk) 22:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is entirely obvious - the fact is there is no evidence in the article of this possible notability. I could easily have nominated the article for a third A7 and had the author blocked, but chose this forum in order to allow editors to see if there is any justification in the creator's persistence. So if you are concerned we might be at risk of losing a worthy article, by all means go ahead and prove notability. Skomorokh 22:55, 31 March 2008 (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.