Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Umer: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:43, 9 August 2008 editDeepak D'Souza (talk | contribs)6,451 edits →Mohammad Umer: reply to pectore← Previous edit Latest revision as of 04:18, 5 February 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''Delete'''. ]<small><sup>]</sup></small> 18:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

===]=== ===]===
{{ns:0|B}}
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}}


:{{la|Mohammad Umer}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> :{{la|Mohammad Umer}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude>
Line 14: Line 22:
*'''Strong Delete''': This is Misplaced Pages , not Mills and Boon to feature some silly love story! Hundreds of people convert every days in order to get married to someone from another relegion, How is this any different. --] (] • ]) 05:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC) *'''Strong Delete''': This is Misplaced Pages , not Mills and Boon to feature some silly love story! Hundreds of people convert every days in order to get married to someone from another relegion, How is this any different. --] (] • ]) 05:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
:'''Comment''': Might I also add that this article was created by a well known POV pusher. So I really wouldnt attach any credence to this article. --] (] • ]) 09:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC) :'''Comment''': Might I also add that this article was created by a well known POV pusher. So I really wouldnt attach any credence to this article. --] (] • ]) 09:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
::'''Comment''' - The story merited coverage in India. I notice that your edits were reverted by "POV pusher" and company (and that you were accused of trolling as well), leading me to believe your credibility can be questioned as well. But back on the actual topic at hand, it merits mention on Misplaced Pages in some fashion due to its widespread coverage, though I also believe now that a page is unnecessary and that wikinews/the like is a more proper form of description.]<sup>]</sup> 18:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC) ::'''Comment''' - The story merited coverage in India. <small>Personal statements removed</small>But back on the actual topic at hand, it merits mention on Misplaced Pages in some fashion due to its widespread coverage, though I also believe now that a page is unnecessary and that wikinews/the like is a more proper form of description.]<sup>]</sup> 18:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
:::'''Reply''': I will reply to your personal comments on your talk page. W.r.t the news coverage , every second day there is some news report in the paper about some inter-caste love story with opposing parents & community members, court cases, police protection etc etc. Should they all feature in Misplaced Pages as notable just because newspapers cover them? What is so special about this love story? --] (] • ]) 19:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC) :::'''Reply''': I will reply to your personal comments on your talk page. W.r.t the news coverage , every second day there is some news report in the paper about some inter-caste love story with opposing parents & community members, court cases, police protection etc etc. Should they all feature in Misplaced Pages as notable just because newspapers cover them? What is so special about this love story? --] (] • ]) 19:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
::::'''Reply''' - I have removed personal comments, I dont think it was right for me to escalate this into a mud-digging page. The point is that unless you find a case with similar notability, we dont have a reason to believe it does not merit coverage. It went to the Bombay High court, it merits over 300 google news hits. Just remember that wikipedia has notability guidelines for a reason. If papers cover it, there is obviously some importance to it. The marriage itself isnt a big deal I agree, but the rammifications of divisions within the sindhi panchayat, the apparent hypocrisy of the RSS/Bajrang Dal/etc, and the legal events make it notable.
*'''Delete''' New stories should go to ]. This is a ] event that in the future will eventually lose notability. <b><font color="teal">]</font></b>''<sup><font color="teal">]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="teal">]</font></b></sup> 08:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC) *'''Delete''' New stories should go to ]. This is a ] event that in the future will eventually lose notability. ]'']'' <sup>]</sup> 08:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''': Non-notable person.--] (]) 12:02, 9 August 2008 (UTC) *'''Delete''': Non-notable person.--] (]) 12:02, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 04:18, 5 February 2022

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. BJ 18:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Mohammad Umer

Mohammad Umer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Bio of non notable. News coverage of one story cited. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 15:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Weak Keep or Merge: the incident is notable in itself, although i don't know if the person should be the topic of the article, or the incident, or if it should be removed and merged in a more general article like Islam in India, or a (non existent) Hindi-Muslim Marriages in India. Gorgonzola (talk) 15:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment: Might I also add that this article was created by a well known POV pusher. So I really wouldnt attach any credence to this article. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 09:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Comment - The story merited coverage in India. Personal statements removedBut back on the actual topic at hand, it merits mention on Misplaced Pages in some fashion due to its widespread coverage, though I also believe now that a page is unnecessary and that wikinews/the like is a more proper form of description.Pectore 18:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Reply: I will reply to your personal comments on your talk page. W.r.t the news coverage , every second day there is some news report in the paper about some inter-caste love story with opposing parents & community members, court cases, police protection etc etc. Should they all feature in Misplaced Pages as notable just because newspapers cover them? What is so special about this love story? --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 19:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Reply - I have removed personal comments, I dont think it was right for me to escalate this into a mud-digging page. The point is that unless you find a case with similar notability, we dont have a reason to believe it does not merit coverage. It went to the Bombay High court, it merits over 300 google news hits. Just remember that wikipedia has notability guidelines for a reason. If papers cover it, there is obviously some importance to it. The marriage itself isnt a big deal I agree, but the rammifications of divisions within the sindhi panchayat, the apparent hypocrisy of the RSS/Bajrang Dal/etc, and the legal events make it notable.


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.