Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Pakistan

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Pakistan. 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|Pakistan|~~~~}} 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 Pakistan. 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.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Asia.

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

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Pakistan/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also: Wikipedia:Notice board for Pakistan-related topics, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Punjab

Pakistan

Iftekhar Rafsan

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

Article about a non-notable youtuber. Fails GNG. Thilsebatti (talk) 17:30, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Thilsebatti (talk) 17:30, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Internet, and Bangladesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:49, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Atta ul Haq Darvish

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

No reason given. Technical nomination only. AfD created improperly by Mister Bahattar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). Please note that the subject appears to be a mmber of the Senate of Pakistan, which normally indicates notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 08:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. 08:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. 08:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. The subject of the article is a member of the upper house of a national legislature. Easily satisfies WP:NPOL. Lefcentreright Discuss 13:44, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of senators of Pakistan per WP:BIOSPECIAL, as the subject currently does not meet WP:NBASIC but meets one of more of the additional criteria. If WP:SIGCOV is found, ping me. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spice Bazaar (restaurant)

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

Not notable, fails WP:NCORP. Only somewhat in-depth (and still really not) coverage is the FoodNama piece, which is not a great source. The rest are just passing mentions. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 17:32, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Pakistan. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 17:32, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a contested PROD, by the way. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 17:32, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article meets WP:GNG with independent and reliable coverage available in Pakistani media, such as Daily Pakistan, Bloom Pakistan, Lens or Pro Pakistani and other. Spice Bazaar is a notable restaurant within Lahore's dining scene and contributes to the documentation of Pakistani cuisine and culture. Any cleanup concerns can be addressed through editing, not deletion WP:ATD. Strongly suggest for Keep. There are also many related articles are in same tone and style, as this article is also a stub form and can be expanded in coming days because it just created. Thank you. Inimn _(Talk) 18:10, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do any sources besides Food Nama satisfy WP:SIGCOV? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 19:27, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:49, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The News International, Dawn and The Express Tribune have reviews here, here, and here, all easily giving SIGCOV. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 07:32, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zafar Iqbal Marwat

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

Meets WP:ANYBIO but not WP:NBASIC; thus, per WP:BIOSPECIAL, I suggest merging or preferably redirecting to List of serving generals of the Pakistan Army. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:45, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Pakistan. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:45, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Ishaq Khattak (officer)

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

No significant coverage in reliable sources, including from any of the references currently present. Most of the article is currently not verified by the citations. A WP:BEFORE did not find anything to support notability, although Urdu-language sources may have something. I suggest redirecting to List of serving generals of the Pakistan Army. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:02, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, and Pakistan. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:02, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a two star general (3rd highest active rank in Pakistan Army) with country's second highest award (Hilal-i-Imtiaz). Clearly Passes WP:ANYBIO. Behappyyar (talk) 16:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Behappyyar, if WP:GNG is not met, it doesn't matter if the subject meets WP:ANYBIO. See community consensus that "no subject-specific notability guideline supersedes the General Notability Guideline". ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:27, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AirshipJungleman29 The rank of major general, combined with being a Hilal-i-Imtiaz (Military; the second highest award), reflects a career of national-level distinction. These are not routine achievements.
As per WP:NOTE: "The barometer of notability is whether reliable sources cover the subject in significant detail." In military contexts, however, high-ranking officers are often not profiled in depth unless involved in controversy. Behappyyar (talk) 17:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Every major general of Pakistan (of whom there are currently 186) has received the Hilal-i-Imtiaz; that is the routine purpose of the award. Yes, if an officer, no matter how high-ranking, has not received coverage in reliable sources, they are not notable. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:31, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AirshipJungleman29 Your assertion here is factually incorrect, it is not the case that every Major General in Pakistan receives the Hilal-i-Imtiaz. There is no official policy mandating this. Even if a significant number are awarded it, that does not diminish its status as a nationally recognized honor (2nd highest award) explicitly listed under WP:ANYBIO.

More importantly, WP:ANYBIO does not require an award to be rare, it requires that the subject has received a "widely recognized honor or award at a national level" or "held a significant command position in a national military organization." This subject satisfies both conditions: a two-star general and a recipient of the Hilal-i-Imtiaz.

Additionally, coverage in reliable sources is a requirement of WP:GNG, but it is not a requirement of WP:ANYBIO. As per WP:N:

"Satisfying any one of the notability guidelines is sufficient for notability."

Behappyyar (talk) 17:53, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind pointing out where WP:N states that latter quote Behappyyar? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AirshipJungleman29 I wrote it in my own words. Here is the exact quote:

A topic is presumed to merit an article if:

It meets either the general notability guideline (GNG) below, or the criteria outlined in a subject-specific notability guideline (SNG). Behappyyar (talk) 19:02, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And what are the criteria outlined in the subject-specific notability guideline? You are looking for WP:NBASIC, which requires "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject". WP:ANYBIO is part of the "additional criteria", where people "are likely to be notable" but "meeting one or more [criteria] does not guarantee that a subject should be included".

If an article does not meet the basic criteria but meets the additional criteria, you should look at the section titled "Failing basic criteria but meeting additional criteria". There, you see that the best solution is to "Merge the article into a broader article providing context." In this case, I suggest merging or redirecting to List of serving generals of the Pakistan Army.

I think this encompassses my full argument, and will not be responding further in this nomination. Best wishes, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:21, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Siding with AirshipJungleman29 here. The biggest issue is simply the lack of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources (WP:GNG) for this general. The Hilal-i-Imtiaz award is routinely given to every major general in the Pakistan Army. So, it's a common service award, not something that automatically makes someone notable for their own Wikipedia page, especially when there aren't in-depth articles written about them elsewhere. Wikipedia's WP:N policy is clear: just because someone might fit a subject-specific guideline like WP:ANYBIO, it doesn't matter if we can't find solid, independent sources to actually write the article from. Rackaballa (talk) 01:46, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If a subject meets the criteria under WP:ANYBIO, they are presumed notable — and in that case (for army person who holds an major office or command), the level of "significant coverage" required under WP:GNG is not necessary. Behappyyar (talk) 06:31, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fazal Ali Khan

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

This individual article fails in WP:GNG, and WP:SIGCOV. There is only passing mention in news articles from a single news organization. The other two sources also have only WP:TRIVIALMENTION that he was the son of Chaudhri Sultan Ali that doesn't confirm the notability even when his father's article doesn't even exist. Delete this article per WP:FAILN. Sybercracker (talk) 15:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Asia, Pakistan, India, and Punjab. Sybercracker (talk) 15:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom, the nominator has a best reason. It seems article have many issues with sources. Dolphish (talk) 00:18, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
what issues? Elaborate Anpanman11 (talk) 14:13, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Check all reasons are already given above. Sybercracker (talk) 19:04, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find any reliable sources, so it's fails WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 05:57, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
british era contemporary gazetteers, reports, as well as modern news outlets and official Pakistan government sites in entionedhim many times. Aren't they reliable enough.? Anpanman11 (talk) 14:15, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Still all issues exist as were before the nomination. You added sources [3] & [5] in the 3rd source only mentioned the 75th death anniversary of 'Fazal Ali Khan' that is lacking in WP:SIGCOV. 5th source mentioned 'Nawabzada Haider Mehdi' is great-grandson of Fazal Ali Khan. Gazeeters, or census reports of Britishers are not as much reliable as modern academic sources, even when you have not cited such gazetters that can eleborate significant coverage of the subject. Sybercracker (talk) 19:14, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

70.9% copyrighted content still exist on this article even after the warnings/reminders. Sybercracker (talk) 19:22, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tasleem Ahmed Sabri

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

Article Tasleem Ahmed Sabri fails to demonstrate significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources, as required under the general notability guideline WP:GNG. References cited are either primary sources (e.g. his own TV programs, ARY Qtv) or a self published Hamariweb profile which is also not reliable reference.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. Behappyyar (talk) 17:31, 19 July 2025 (UTC) [reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:01, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Clearly fails WP:GNG even WP:THREE. Baqi:) (talk) 11:42, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hind-Pak Bordernama

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

Fails WP:NBOOK. Author and publisher are both non-notable. The two sources in the article [1] [2] are both largely interviews of the author, which are excluded under WP:NBOOK: publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book. The only other source I found during WP:BEFORE is this brief article [3] which just says that the book was "widely acclaimed". Astaire (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Pakistan, and India. Astaire (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aapa Shameem

AfDs for this article:

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

Closed as no consensus last month. Original rationale - "YouTube series that fails notability guidelines. Sourcing is unreliable or social media links. Twice decliend at AfC and an attempted move back to draftspace as an WP:ATD was obejcted to by creator." Recently discovered that one of !keep votes is a SOCK, leaving the creator Keep vote and a WP:VW vote for keep. Attempted to redirect yesterday and was told to take it back to AfD so here we are. CNMall41 (talk) 16:28, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Pakistan. CNMall41 (talk) 16:29, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
pinging non-Sock voters @Reshmaaaa:, @Rahmatula786:, @Behappyyar:. Also note the many disruption attempts to close the previous discussion early, leaving to protection of the discussion. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:31, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Aapa Shameem meets the criteria for notability as defined by WP:GNG and WP:NENT. The series has received WP:SIGCOV, non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources:

- DAWN has published at least two critical columns analyzing the show themes, characters, and broadcast platform, not merely mentioning it.

- Independent Urdu, a variant of The Independent, ran an analytical feature article titled (translated to English) "Aapa Shameem: Good for few and Bad for the others" which covers the show in depth.

- South Asia Magazine, a regional magazine provided full plot, cast, and broadcast details, showing editorial depth.

- Additional coverge from The Nation, Samaa TV, The Express Tribune, and BizAsiaLive (UK) adds independent recognition and visibility.

These outlets meet the standards of WP:RS and are unaffiliated with the subject. Claims that the show is a “YouTube series” are demonstrably false – it aired on a national broadcast network, as confirmed by DAWN.

Also, no references in the article rely on social media or user-generated platforms. The current nomination hinges largely on a procedural point (sock vote), not a new substantive challenge to the article's notability. In line with WP:NOTABILITY and WP:ATD, this article deserves to remain in the mainspace. The table below demonstrates the show meets WP:GNG and WP:NENT via coverage in reliable, independent, and in-depth sources which go beyond trivial mentions and fulfill notability criteria per WP:GNG and WP:NENT.

Source	Type	Coverage	Independence	Reliability	Summary of Content
DAWN – The Tube Column	National newspaper	In-depth analysis	Independent of subject	High	Discusses broadcast details, themes of domestic power dynamics, and show's placement on national TV; not a passing mention.
Independent Urdu	Reputable news site (localized version of The Independent)	Thematic critique	Independent	High	Critical column titled “Aapa Shameem: Good for Few and Bad for the Others” – explores polarizing viewer reactions and social commentary.
SouthAsia Magazine	Regional print & digital magazine	Feature article	Independent	High	Offers comprehensive plot summary, cast information, and significance of the series in Pakistani pop culture.
The Nation	National newspaper	Mention with context	Independent	High	Cites the series in the context of TV viewership and debut performances.
The Express Tribune	English-language national daily (partnered with The New York Times)	Trends coverage	Independent	High	Analyzes how the show gained attraction via YouTube uploads by the official broadcaster.
Samaa TV	Private national broadcaster	Coverage of lead actress's debut	Independent	Medium–High	Highlights the debuut of lead actor Zoha Tauqeer and the show's role in launching her career.
BizAsiaLive (UK)	British entertainment/media site	Ratings and visibility	Independent	Medium	Reports on South Asian TV shows’ international performance and reception in UK-based diaspora.

Also as claimed, I'm in no hurry to close the discussion. If that would have been the casez why would I confidently ask the nominator to take it to WP:AfD again. Reshmaaaa (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:03, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kallar Kahar Science College

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

This article's pretty much built entirely on primary sources. If it weren't an educational institution, it would've been an easy A7 speedy delete. But since A7 doesn't apply here, I'm bringing it to AfD instead. Junbeesh (talk) 11:55, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Pakistan. Junbeesh (talk) 11:55, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The article meets notability requirements under WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES and WP:General Notability Guideline. The college has been the subject of multiple independent, reliable news sources:

In 2013, it secured all top three positions in the Pre-Medical and Pre-Engineering groups in BISE Rawalpindi's HSSC results. (Dawn, link)
In 2018, a student from the college achieved first position again in the BISE results. (Geo News, link)
The institution has also been covered by 24NewsHD following a transportation incident in 2025. (link)

These reliable, third-party sources demonstrate that the college is independently notable beyond its own promotional materials. I have added verifiable references, improved neutrality, and rewritten the article to comply with Wikipedia content policies. Unknown (talk) 12:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@FaheemPindiSaidpur The first two sources link to irrelevant articles and the third source leads to an error page. Please do not use LLMs to communicate or write anything on Wikipedia, see WP:LLM. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 19:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you for notifying me. I'm improving this page Unknown (talk) 03:40, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Science. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:25, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesn't meet the WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES and WP:GNG. Links above provided by an editor leads to error, page not found or irrelevant news article. Behappyyar (talk) 11:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources, appears that minimal coverage exists outside of social media mentions. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 19:34, 18 July 2025 (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.

Tahirkheli

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

GNG fails, not enough coverage Dolphish (talk) 03:48, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Ethnic groups, Asia, and Pakistan. Dolphish (talk) 03:48, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – This page has been dramatically shrunk over time. It seems to have had issues with edit warring and original research. Some of the sources it used to cite included [4] and [5]. – Ike Lek (talk) 04:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 04:13, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tehreek-e-Nizam-e-Mustafa

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

Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Islam, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:17, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Move as it was a notable movement to implement Islamic law in specifically Azad Kashmir region (not in Pakistan). So move it to Tehreek-e-Nizam-e-Mustafa Azad Kashmir. Behappyyar (talk) 15:31, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Washuk bus accident

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

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability, and high-casualty bus crashes are common. Fails WP:EVENT. Per WP:NOPAGE, this is better covered at List of traffic collisions (2000–present) or a brief mention in Washuk. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:08, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Transportation, and Pakistan. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 19:08, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (weak) - PM and notable people commented, and event seems recent, so might still prove notable via WP:LASTING, maybe - Asdfjrjjj (talk) 19:49, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep terrible mass casualty accident, clearly notable. What another horrible accident. JMWt (talk) 20:23, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT – Per WP:GNG, "sources should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability". From what I've been able to find, none of the sources were secondary since none of them contained analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the event itself. The event does not have in-depth nor sustained continued coverage of the event itself with coverage only briefly occurring in the aftermath of the accident. No lasting effects or long-term impacts on a significant region have been demonstrated. WP:EVENTCRIT#4 states that routine kinds of news events including most accidents – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance, which this event lacks per the above. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:52, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well unsurprisingly the families do not consider this to be a news story. In July 2024 they made public their call for a boycott of the bus company and the bus company was shut down after an investigation.

If I could search better in Urdu, I think there are very strong indications that there is more analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis to be found in the media and sustained coverage beyond a single day. JMWt (talk) 17:25, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify The main point of disagreement here seems to be that it is unclear if this is a case of WP:LASTING. Therefore, I think the best idea is to keep it as a draft form rather than going all the way on a delete and see if the accident continues to be notable since it only happened a little over a year ago. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 17:38, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep This article could be massively improved by someone who can read Urdu (as JMWt noted). Although poor, the subject even as is is significant enough. Electricmemory (talk) 11:14, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Draftification can be useful for "hot-off-the-press" events. For something that happened over a year ago, an extra six months of incubation rarely changes the outcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:49, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan Champions Cricket League

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

No evidence this event passes WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:51, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Cricket, and Pakistan. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:51, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: not enough WP:SIGCOV on independent reliable sources other than WP:ROUTINE coverage. Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio 16:31, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 16:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shah Latif and his message

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

This is mentioned in two English sources but not quite enough to be significant. Attempted to search in Sindhi but didn't have much luck. If more coverage does not exist, I would suggest redirecting to author G. M. Syed, but the title is incorrectly capitalized. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:08, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:08, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:09, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep a very well known topic Shaahaajaahaan (talk) 12:47, 9 July 2025 (UTC)~~ — Shaahaajaahaan (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Aniruddhchaudhuy (talk · contribs). [reply]

@Shaahaajaahaan That isn't a notability guideline, and no, this book isn't. PARAKANYAA (talk) 12:56, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 00:40, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to G. M. Syed: Book did not meet notability guidelines, i will go with the redirect to it's author. Behappyyar (talk) 09:17, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear a few more voices here on what should happen with this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:38, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge whatever unsatisfactory coverage that has been demonstrated of this subject in this article into the main article. Barnt Toust 02:50, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to main article to preserve some of the content. Archrogue (talk) 14:50, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Files for deletion

Category discussion debates

Template discussion debates

Redirects for deletion

MfD discussion debates

Other deletion discussions