Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonny Khan

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. Per consensus we are not voting but having a discussion to ascertain the quality of arguments as viewed through the lens of policy (and guidelines). Merely asserting that there is enough coverage to justify an independent article is ultimately insufficient at AfD. This was relisted twice in order to provide the numerous people asserting that Khan qualifies for an independent article a chance to demonstrate that; only one editor attempted to do so. On the other hand a significant number of editors suggesting delete use reasons supported by our policies and guidelines. As such there is a consensus to delete. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sonny Khan edit

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Being a founder of a newly created organization is not enough to justify notability. Fails WP:GNG. Recently moved to Draft. GermanKity (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. -Hatchens (talk) 08:25, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, notability is not inherited from the company. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:27, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- He got enough media coverage and also every source are reliable. So, don’t delete. P.H.TARU

Please provide WP:THREE. GermanKity (talk) 15:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- He got enough media coverage and also every source are reliable. So, don’t delete. FardousTWG — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.25.250.246 (talk) 14:06, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note Keep vote by ip address. GermanKity (talk) 02:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the coverage seems paid and do not independent of the subject.GermanKity (talk) 15:03, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- Though he's a founder of a newly created organization, this guy got some good coverage and seems like pretty much famous. Also, google search results of his name is quite vast. So, passes WP:GNG in my opinion.

Seems like this comment is added to increase the 'Keep' votes.GermanKity (talk) 15:10, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Enough independent news media coverage there for him from reliable newspapers and third party independent sources (8 references) to show his notability. Passes WP:GNG. Ngrewal1 (talk) 00:26, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Few lines about Asad Qureshi below here are a left-over from the previous AfD already officially closed. The AfD closing person forgot to clean up? Ngrewal1 (talk) 00:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, he got significant coverage from secondary, reliable and independent sources, Article passes WP:GNG. Abdulhaseebatd (talk) 13:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - He meets general notability guidelines; there are articles about him by secondary reliable sources.--Eastview2018 (talk) 14:16, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: useful and improve-able —¿philoserf? (talk) 20:57, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Some very average-on-a-policy-level contributions above, and not enough good ones to form a consensus. Relisting for 7 days.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: He got enough media coverage also his foundation which meets general notability.
Keep: Significant news coverage exists. Peter303x (talk) 09:23, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I had draftified it and seems like it was moved. Even if it is assumed that the project he is CEO of is notable, that also doesn't grant him automatic notability since it can't be inherited. None of the sources indicate any contribution towards notability for biographies. Randoms keeps above are distraction and should be ignored until and unless sources are presented accompanied with the logic on how that source contributes to notability. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 17:33, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Enough independent news media coverage there for him from reliable newspapers and third party independent sources to show his notability. Passes WP:GNG.Check out again and keep that article. He got coverage form 'Michigan Daily' newspaper.User:P.H.TARU (talk) 4:33, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

User:P.H.TARU, saying that sources exists and go and check them is not a valid argument and is simply an attempt to gaslight. Please provide them here at this discussion for everyone to look at. And you can't vote twice. You have already voted once. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:50, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Comments such as "Has coverage" or "meets GNG" are mostly useless. Please tell us which specific sources cover the person in sufficient detail to allow us to write an article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:46, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

keep Check out number "1" news maybe it’s enough.
Redirect to Paani Project. The article reeks of self-promotion, as do the sources. Apart from the non-profit (which recently survived AFD), there's nothing of encyclopedic note, just some nice points for a college student's resume. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 02:37, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
keep This should have already been ended and kept with so many Keep votes. I agree with the keep voters. Here are examples of Good indepth coverage: [1], [2], [3], [4].Lesliechin1 (talk) 23:28, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two of those links are to a university student newspaper, and one is the sympathetic biography from an award he won. The fourth is the Jackson Citizen Patriot giving a high-school-student award to a high-school student. NONE of them are at all useful for meeting GNG. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 23:46, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I keep hearing the word 'student' in above comments to de-emphasize and undermine the accomplishments of this young man. We were all students at one time or the other? How many of us were able to found a non-profit organization like he did? In my view, this young man was able to accomplish and do something extraordinary. Also The Michigan Daily was founded in 1890 and is definitely a Reliable Source from The University of Michigan - a top university of the United States. Ngrewal1 (talk) 21:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:BASIC. A promo article an unremarkable business executive; sourcing is in passing and / or WP:SPIP. Notability is not inherited from Paani Project, and there's nothing better. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:39, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of indepth secondary sources demonstrating notability. I agree with power's analysis of the sources at 23:46, 5 July 2021 (UTC). As I noted when I relisted this a few weeks ago, there has been a barrage of poor-quality 'keep' !votes wth little or no reference to policy, and this continued post-relist too (as noted by Sandstein). Daniel (talk) 05:47, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Student newspaper coverage of activties by students at an academic institution are generally not considered signs on notability. This article is overly promotional and on-encyclopedic and needs to be deleted.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:01, 14 July 2021 (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.