Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Police

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Police. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Police|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Police. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Police/archive

Purge page cache

watch

This list includes sublists of deletion debates on articles related to Wikipedia:WikiProject Law.

Police

Rick Goodale

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

Coverage of racing career is minimal, limited to database entries & generic entry list sources. Anything moderately decent is from his time as a police officer, of which the only coverage received was losing his job, which does not extend beyond local coverage from what i found Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 23:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Couldn't find any SIGCOV and I don't belive racing in Arca is inherently notable. Esolo5002 (talk) 01:00, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have found more sources regarding his racing career as well as his occupation before his firing Finn Shipley (talk) 01:32, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sources you added are not significant coverage. Esolo5002 (talk) 02:20, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Police, Motorsport, Maryland, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:49, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Seems to be a case of WP:ONEEVENT. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 16:46, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Girolamo Di Fazio

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

Nomination: Notability questioned. Appears to be notable for only one event (the arrest of someone who is notable). ash (talk) 15:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Italy. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:57, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gaurav Yadav (police officer)

AfDs for this article:

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

Was deleted back in 2023, and despite the non-notable award they received in 2025, still does not pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police, Punjab, and Uttar Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:18, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. No significant independent coverage found. Chronos.Zx (talk) 07:34, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Commands a very large police force and satisfies WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:56, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yao Yuanjun

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

Typical case of WP:1E; otherwise non-notable. Schwede 66 00:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and China. Schwede 66 00:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Event was highly covered and also pretty notable thanks to the Police dog. Subject was notable both in 2011(when he died) and 2021 (when the video of his police dog came out). Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:44, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:1E. - Amigao (talk) 01:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Police. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep until we have an article about the event. Or just add "Death of" to the title. WP:BIO1E does not suggest deletion, it suggests renaming or merging. We could add "death of" to the title.

What 1E says is this: 'When an individual is significant for their role in a single event, it may be unclear whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both. In considering whether to create separate articles, the degree of significance of the event itself and of the individual's role within it should both be considered. The general rule is to cover the event, not the person. However, if media coverage of both the event and the individual's role grow larger, separate articles may become justified. ... Another issue arises when an individual plays a major role in a minor event. In this case, it is not generally appropriate to have separate articles on the person and the event. Generally in this case, the name of the person should redirect to the article on the incident, especially if the individual is only notable for that incident and it is all that the person is associated with in the source coverage.'

Nowhere here suggests deletion. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:11, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would also support this, however the subject is also notable in the aspect of the story about his police dog Thehistorianisaac (talk) 03:26, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that also kind of about the event though? I oppose deletion in any case. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your opinion, but the subject gained significant coverage in two separate events which are interlinked:

In 2011 when he was killed in action(now, this itself would not guarantee notability, but it shows he has been covered for multiple events)
In 2021 when the CCTV-7 video went viral of his police dog waiting for him.

Either way, I would support keeping the article. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 04:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:12, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but also support changing the title to include "Death of ...." as this person appears to be primarily notable for the manner of his death. Also the behaviour of his police dog appears notable because of his death and contributes to persistent coverage of the death. As already observed, WP:BIO1E is more about what to write the article about and the article should be about the event, not the person. The article cites a dozen sources, although all are in Chinese. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 09:00, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wang Xiaolong (coast guard)

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

Typical case of WP:1E; otherwise non-notable. To be awarded bravery medals etc posthumously by the state doesn't change that. Schwede 66 00:40, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Police, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: No other publicly available case of Chinese coast guardsmen(To be exact, the post-2013 chinese coast guard, not the pre-2013 border defense coast guard with the same english name that currently lacks an article) dying in the line of duty. Also had significant coverage. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:1E. - Amigao (talk) 02:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even though the subject is no longer alive, please see Wikipedia:What BLP1E is not. The AFD fails both criteria 2 and 3. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 03:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see this in a situation similar to the Yang Jia article(except the roles are reversed):

Both are notable mainly due to one event, and both of the articles mainly focus on the people themselves because most of the media coverage focused on the person.

I am open to renaming it to "Death of Wang Xiaolong" instead of deletion, though most of the coverage on him focuses on his entire career and the subject himself Thehistorianisaac (talk) 12:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - clearly WP:1E. WP:NOTBLP1E supports deletion as (1) subject only notable for a single event, (2) was low profile outside this event, and (3) the event was not significant and Wang's role was neither substantial nor well documented. I'd normally say keep due to receiving a significant honor, but it doesn't look like it was awarded for personal achievements. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 14:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note:

This is the first publicly avaliable case since 2013 of a coast guardsman getting killed in action. Additionally, this was highly documented in Chinese media, particularly southern china. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 23:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, being the first coast guard to die is not a notability criterion. Secondly, the coverage is not significant as it is not independent; it's all Chinese media praising someone who received a state award as part of a propaganda effort. That said, merging this information into China Coast Guard#Line of duty deaths is a reasonable AtD. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 04:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep just rename. WP:1 says the rule is to cover the event, and so not to have another article. We do not have another article on the event. Just put "death of" in front of the title. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would also agree, but as stated above, this is sort of a similar situation to how we have the article named Yang Jia but not "2008 Zhabei attacks", since a lot of media attention was also about the subject himself. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 23:56, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kashimpur Thana

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

Police station does not appear to be notable. Although there are four sources, that may not be sufficient for WP:NBUILDING policy, which requires .." they require significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability.". Emphasis on "in-depth".

Creator of article should provide quotes from sources to show that the sources cover the place "in depth"... more than cursory.

Note that the creator of this article may have created many articles recently on minor police stations within Bangladesh, I'm not sure. See Category:Thanas of Dhaka etc. I'm sure that many police stations in the country _are_ notable for historical or architectural reasons. But many are probably not notable. I'm not sure how AfD process manages multiple articles. Noleander (talk) 21:17, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:25, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 22:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Seriously? It hasnt even been a day since I created the page, you do realize that these are administrative units? Right? See other AfDs for example: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tajhat Thana, this isn't just about a police station, it is about a administrative unit, Thanas are equivalent to upazilas in Bangladesh, while Wikipedia is not a directory, not creating these pages would cause some issues as many information will be missing. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:16, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station. (2) Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 19:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There is ZERO evidence these "police stations" are "tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila". I do not see but three mundane or routine news reports (WP:NOTNEWS) about criminal activities of the Officer-in-Charge (OC). Two of the sources are "Jago News 24" so, if about the subject and not criminal activities of an OC, would count as one source towards notability. There is no significant coverage in reliable and independent sources about the actual "police station", NOR any connection to an administrative division, subdivision, or "units". By-the-way: When the sources levy accusations on a person, they are considered innocent until proven guilty in the US. "IF" it were notable to the world-at-large, and if kept regardless of policies and guidelines, the title needs an RFC for a name change to something like Criminal activities at Kashimpur Thana. -- Otr500 (talk) 04:31, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Who said there is no evidence that thanas are administrative units? Did you forget Wikipedia:Before and that there is a government that rules Bangladesh and administration is decentralizated? Divisions, districts, upazilas, Thanas, unions, wards, villages, mahallas, mouzas, municipalities (Pourashova), etc? BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Appears to be non-notable local administrative unit. No extensive coverage. Chronos.Zx (talk) 16:32, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Tongi West Thana, in particular, is an officially established thana under Gazipur Metropolitan Police. It serves a distinct and populous region, and is referenced in news sources and law enforcement records. It will be better sourced if some time was given to me before a AfD and even then, improving it is better than a AfD here, Just because its role differs from that of an upazila does not make it non-notable. The absence of “extensive coverage” is a reflection of how administrative units are covered in media — they are often referenced rather than being the subject of long-form profiles. Many similar-level jurisdictions in other countries (e.g., city boroughs, precincts) are accepted as notable with similar sourcing patterns.

Thus, deleting this article on the grounds of general notability misunderstands the nature of administrative relevance in urban Bangladesh. The page documents a real, government-recognized jurisdiction that continues to serve a public function.BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 12:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bamna Thana

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

Probably not notable: does not meet WP:NBUILDING. This is the third AfD I've submitted (as part of WP:NPP) on minor police stations in Bangladesh. I won't submit any more AfDs on these articles. I'll let the AfD people take it from here and decide if they want to review all the other newly-created articles by the same editor. Noleander (talk) 21:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 22:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - Wikipedia is not just a spam delete section, you don't delete every article after just seeing it, check why and is this even relevant? This is indeed relevant, Thanas are equivalent to sub-districts in Bangladesh, it isn't just a random police station, While [[Hussain Muhammad Ershad]] in the 1980s did convert many thanas into subdistricts under a decentralization programme, thanas remain and there are atleast 652 thanas, each covering lots of information, not creating these pages and nominating them for AfD is not applicable, in fact I was creating this pages less than a day ago, I couldn't sleep due to Wikipedia notification sounds that another article was nominated to be deleted, its too soon plus improve the article yourself then, Wikipedia is not a one-sided encyclopedia, it must be contributed to by multiple individuals! Pages about Administrative units should remain on the encyclopedia. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 19:27, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: LMAO. Wikipedia is not a directory or yellow pages. This is a non-notable "police station". The opening statement is, "Bamna Thana (Bengali: বামনা থানা, lit. 'Bamna Police Station') is a police station in Bamna, Barguna, Barisal, Bangladesh". It is sourced with two primary Bangladesh National Portal, Government of Bangladesh sources, that does NOT advance notability, and a jagonews24.com source with the title Teenager poisoned after failing to 'marry' boyfriend. What "tertiary administrative division"? Please don't tell me an editor is thinking of, or working on, creating 652 police station articles? It looks like it. A couple of primary sources and a news report like another "police station" Rajon killing: Jalalabad OC suspended. WOW! There are over 18 THOUSAND "police stations" in the US. How about writing articles on political "subdistricts" or actual "Administrative units" and including the "police stations" there? Are these considered notable in the bn.wikipedia.org? Lacking significant coverage in reliable and independent sources, maybe even historical significance, a police station is not notable. Noleander, don't give up! If there is a list out there, somewhere, then someone will want to make articles. Some may be notable, but does Wikipedia need to know some local news that Marzia slept with her husband and children, then... (Daily Kalbela) "was stabbed to death by her mentally challenged husband...". Some interesting translations, "Marzia, who was killed in the marriage, is the mother of three children". News reports offers nothing that adds to the notability of this article or Gafargaon Thana. -- Otr500 (talk) 03:44, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, Wikipedia is not for jokes always, maybe some but this was not meant to be humorous, so i dont know what is making you laugh so much, second, You told Noleander to not give up, and if there is a list, someone will try to make articles, is this like a war or something? No its not, dont make it look dramatic, and isnt creating pages good, like without it, would Wikipedia have ever existed? And no this is not a directory, please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, i will try to make more pages to be fair plus just because I did not give a source that thanas are a administrative unit, doesnt mean it isn't, plus I created these pages not even a day and these were already nominated for AfD, like give some time, when a page is stable, I have time to add more in-depth sources to it but when a AfD occurs, my focus shifts and if i do make any edits, the sources are partial, and who even talked about Gafargaon Thana here? I didn't, nobody did, when I create pages, i leave 3 sources there and add more sometime later, thats why you may see some inaccuracies but those are just to start the article, now if i can't even start a article and expand it without a freaking AfD in not even a day, whom's notification disturbs my sleep, then what is the point of all this? I understand your concern about GNG but give some time alright and your arguments need improvement. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:12, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My purpose was not to show that Wikipedia is a directory, its not, my purpose was to create pages of Thanas (administrative units and a police station, they serve two roles, they are equivalent to upazilas [sub-districts], according to the Bangladesh Government and related sources), now i take time to fully improve the page, if someone doesnt even give me that time, then don't expect me and other editors to add in-depth, independent, secondary sources to it. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:16, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Similar article[1], my stand remains the same as in the Kashimpur Thana AfD. Chronos.Zx (talk) 13:10, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The actual administration subdivision is referred to as a Bamna Upazila.

Creating articles is paramount to the continued growth of Wikipedia. The age-old argument of sourcing being required on an article, or not, is just an argument of confusion. Our policy on verifiability states two instances when, not only is a reference required but a inline citation is mandated, and includes:

material whose verifiability has been
challenged and

material whose verifiability is likely to be challenged

Creating possibly hundreds of articles, in these cases about what are "police stations' that has not been validly refuted with sources, is a WP:REDFLAG. All police stations, pretty much in all the world, are actually "administrative units". Asserting a Thana is a "Tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila" and "equivalent to upazilas [sub-districts]" appear to be inaccurate or at the very least confusing. Thanas of Bangladesh and Upazila have information that the name Thana, literally meaning "police station", was changed, changed back, and finally changed again in 1982 to Upazila. There are still Thanas and some Upazilas have more than one Thana. However, a "Thana" is under the administration of the Upazila (Upazila Parishad) where it is located.

The name "Thana", as an administrated body, was replaced under a national reform in 1982. A Upazila Nirbahi Officer (UNO) is the Chief Executive officer of a Upazila, and the chief officer of a Thana.

Sourcing an article, especially when there are only three such sources, using mundane police reports, does not advance notability. -- Otr500 (talk) 14:08, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tongi West Thana

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

Police station does not appear to be notable. Although there are four sources, that may not meet WP:NBUILDING, which requires .." they require significant in-depth coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability.". Emphasis on "in-depth".

Creator of article should provide quotes from sources to show that the sources cover the place "in depth"... more than cursory. Noleander (talk) 21:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Bangladesh. Shellwood (talk) 21:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? It hasnt even been a day since I created the page, you do realize that these are administrative units? Right? See other AfDs for example: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tajhat Thana, this isn't just about a police station, it is about a administrative unit, Thanas are equivalent to upazilas in Bangladesh, while Wikipedia is not a directory, not creating these pages would cause some issues as many information will be missing. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:14, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Wikipedia is not just a spam delete section, you don't delete every article after just seeing it, check why and is this even relevant? This is indeed relevant, Thanas are equivalent to sub-districts in Bangladesh, it isn't just a random police station, While Hussain Muhammad Ershad in the 1980s did convert many thanas into subdistricts under a decentralization programme, thanas remain and there are atleast 652 thanas, each covering lots of information, not creating these pages and nominating them for AfD is not applicable, in fact I was creating these pages less than a day ago, I couldn't sleep due to Wikipedia notification sounds that another article was nominated to be deleted, its too soon plus improve the article yourself then, Wikipedia is not a one-sided encyclopedia, it must be contributed to by multiple individuals. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 02:22, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 19:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lacks significant coverage in reliable and independent sources to advance notability of a "police station". I keep seeing "Thana refers to a tertiary administrative division in Bangladesh similar to Upazila. These subdistricts are based on which areas have police station". Not one time a source to connect (prove it) a local "police station" as an administrative division, subdivision, or unit. I also keep seeing routine news reports that are not about the subject, a "police station". Sources on the article:
1. 1 title: A murder case was filed with Tongi West Police Station,
2. 2 title: SI's body found at Tongi police barrack,
3. 3 title: Same as #2,
4. 4 title: CCTV cameras installed at Tongi West Police Station. If kept, regardless of policies and guidelines, this might mean we could create 18,000 articles on "police stations" in the US. -- Otr500 (talk) 05:07, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My purpose was not to show that Wikipedia is a directory, its not, my purpose was to create pages of Thanas (administrative units and a police station, they serve two roles, they are equivalent to upazilas [sub-districts], according to the Bangladesh Government and related sources), now i take time to fully improve the page, if someone doesnt even give me that time, then don't expect me and other editors to add in-depth, independent, secondary sources to it. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:17, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, create those pages, am i restricting anybody from creating pages about American administrative units or police stations? Am i? Prove that i am restricting it then, you want proof that Thana is a administrative unit? Sure:
1. The Daily Observer, Published 31 March 2019 (redirect)
2. ResearchGate
3. Banglapedia
BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 09:26, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BangladeshiEditorInSylhet, you have edited the article Thanas of Bangladesh. It has not been challenged that "After being reinstated in 1992, the thana system was reverted back to the upazila system in 1999", or "In contemporary usage, the term "thana" specifically denotes police precincts and their respective police stations." This source clearly indicates "This system was reverted to the thana system in 1992. Later in 1999 geographic regions under administrations of thanas were converted into upazilas. All administrative terms in this level were renamed from thana to upazila." The Administrative geography of Bangladesh gives no mention of any administrative equivalent. The history section of the Upazila article goes into detail "The word thana is now used to solely refer to police stations." The Upazila Nirbahi Officer is a non-elected officer within the Upazila. The head of a police station is an inspector. There is much evidence to support the opposite of claims that a Thana is the equivalent of a Upazila. -- Otr500 (talk) 10:36, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Administrative value of thanas did shift into upazilas in 1999 in rural Bangladesh but in urban contexts, thanas still exist and have value, many cities and areas still fall under thanas and just because value shifted doesn't mean thanas are not important in administrative contexts. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 01:34, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: The problem is notability as an organization. If there is sourcing where, what is absolutely just a "police station", is involved in Upazila administrative duties, that might be an exception. The original authority for things like collecting taxes was also transferred to the Upazila. Collecting or any charges would originate from the Upazila, more likely from the UNO. This official is also now part of the Upazila. There is confusion, as I am sure, and according to some sources usurping of authority. A filing (2022) with the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (page 2 and 3) referenced the "Thana Nirbahi Officer (in short, UNO)". A Thana inspector (officer-in-charge or OC) has been referred to as a senior position, yet they are promoted according to the [Junior Police Service Rules 1969]. Apparently, an OC is considered powerful. The rules state that to ensure fair elections an OC is supposed to be transferred every two years. However, even if powerful, maybe breaking rules, their "official administrative duties" are limited to the Thana they are in charge of.

The history section of the Upazila article includes the unsourced However, it was complicated again and currently, Upazilas which combinely form "Administrative Districts" are known as Thanas. For example: Panchlaish Thana, Double Mooring Thana under Chittagong district. This is not only unsourced it is against other article content and sources. I have found zero sources to back up that the Panchlaish Thana or Double Mooring Thana operate in any combination as a Upazila or that any Upazila is referred to as a Thana.

I will bow out in acquiescence if a reliable source can be provided, particularly a law, Bangladesh Code, act of Parliament, ordinance, or even a President’s Order, that allows an exemption to the 1983 national decentralization program, other than the UNO acting as an Ex-Officio Chairman until elections could be held, granting authority to the OC of a Thana to act in an official capacity equivalent to the Chairman of a Upazila.

Note: As mentioned, "IF" there are any "cities and areas" (whatever "areas" mean) where there is some "urban context" that these areas "fall under Thanas", PLEASE! provide sources. This might be an exemption to a "police station" but not for the majority of the around 491 other "police stations" in Bangladesh. -- Otr500 (talk) 15:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Md. Matiur Rahman Sheikh

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

Most sources are just passing mentions or about retirement or Chief, more in-depth sources needed or nomination will not be withdrawn. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bangladesh. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:12, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- Please note a potential retaliation issue: after my deletion nomination of Kishore Kantho under WP:NMAG, User:BangladeshiEditorInSylhet promptly nominated three of my articles—Mohammad Ejaz, Md. Matiur Rahman Sheikh, and Md. Abul Kashem Mia—for deletion. Such retalion is generally discouraged and undermines the assumption of good faith (WP:AGF). Deletion proposals must address content, not serve as personal reprisals (WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND). I urge uninvolved editors to judge each nomination on its own merits and remain alert to any pattern of WP:POINT.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 19:46, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, I would like to address that this was not retaliation, if this was, you would have seen much larger amounts of AfDs seen as "escalation" and the AfDs may not even have a clear reason, second: This page is covered by only passing mentions, please add more information and that is what I am asking, I will withdraw my nomination if you give a good reason to keep. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 14:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:57, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Frivolous nomination. Meets WP:NBIO. Multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources exist that contain significant coverage of him, not just passing mentions.[2][3][4] --Worldbruce (talk) 06:48, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Supervision of police personnel

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

WP:NOTDICT. Just a definition of the term. This adds nothing to the encyclopaedia. Golem08 (talk) 02:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Police-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
keep. Yes, it is just a definition of the term. It is also a stub and a disambiguation. And includes references to texts that contain FULL HELL LOT OF FURTHER INFORMATION. The nomination demonstrates a brilliant example of what "lack of due diligence" means. --Altenmann >talk 04:18, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Police accountability. That goes into far more depth than this article which is just a dictionary definition. Esolo5002 (talk) 04:57, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Disagreed. Different subjects. "Police accountability" goes in far more depth simply because it is a buzzword. "Supervision of police personnel" has nothing to do with "police accountability": "accountability" is how police is seen by public, while "supervision" is internal police works, well-defined by the corresponding regulations, with results not necessarily reported to public. --Altenmann >talk 06:52, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I created this article simply because I need to disambiguate the term "police supervision (disambiguation)", about which nobody paid attention in Wikipedia so far. Since I dont have interests in police work, I created a stub, sufficient to cover the requirements of notability of the concept. --Altenmann >talk 06:55, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Before !voting I strongly suggest to take a quick look into the sources cited and see with your own eyes that the subject does deserve an article. --Altenmann >talk 07:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Police accountability. Differences between public perception and internal supervision could be discussed in new section of article police accountability. HudecEmil (talk) 18:24, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:25, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]