Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarfaraz Khan Marwat

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:15, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sarfaraz Khan Marwat

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

Speedy / Strong Delete The article is about a Colonel of Pakistan Army, who has nothing much to meet WP:Notability. The article be deleted, as it seems another insertion by the same fellow who previously created two articles of same family which are also nominated for deletion. Beside this, the article is also lacking citations. The accuracy and factualty of it is questionable. --LineofWisdom (talk) 12:07, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The nom failed to complete AfD step 2 properly. It is fixed now. No opinion on the merits. Tim Song (talk) 15:25, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. —AustralianRupert (talk) 15:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There appears at least to be some error in the article. In the military career section, it is stated that the subject received (on 19 July 1945) "the highest decoration for gallantry in the face of the enemy"...The highest decoration for gallantry that the subject would have been eligible for at the time would actually have been the Victoria Cross, which I do not believe this subject is a recipient of (if he was, he would be notable). I have searched the London Gazette and find that he received a Mention in Despatches at this time. This can be found by searching the London Gazette Issue 37184, p. 3742 (where his name is mentioned) and p. 3719 where it states that it is an award of an MID. I do not believe an MID confers automatic notability, although it might help in combination with other things.Article is without sources though, so I believe it should be deleted as it fails WP:BIO — AustralianRupert (talk) 15:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Is a Lieutenant Coloner important, notable or worthy to be awarded with an article? The man has, since his retirement, politically supported my father and then me and my brothers but he is not worthy. The award he got in 1945, is equvalient toa certificate in many armies of the world, even Pakistani Army. Check Mention in Despatches, insupportof my comments. --Marwat786 (talk) 07:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC) — Marwat786 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete per WP:BIO and WP:RS. Article is without a single source, and, no disrespect intended what-so-ever, he does not quite appear notable enought for inclusion. Is additionally inaccurate, as AustralianRupert demonstrates. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 07:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per AustralianRupert Nick-D (talk) 08:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This AFD has been mentioned at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Possibly ethnic-related disputes on Pakistani issues. Nyttend (talk) 18:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If you take a look at the article and get the distinct impression that someone thinks the article needs a lot of citations, that someone is the nominator, as they made abundantly clear at 11:56, 16 August 2009. Anarchangel (talk) 00:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep On the military front it's a fit case for AFD, however, with due respect to AustralianRupert's vote, its not the military side which forces me to vote a "Keep". The article mentions that the gentleman was nominated as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora by former Pakistani President General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq. Though there is no reference but if this is true then he was an ex-officio member of the parliament and hence automatically qualifies for Wiki notability. -- MARWAT 16:44, 21 August 2009 (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.