Wikipedia:articles For Deletion Mirza Akhtar Baig

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 keep‎. Consensus with a satisfaction of WP:NPOL. (non-admin closure) TLA (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Mirza Akhtar Baig

[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)

Does not meet WP:POLITICIAN yet. These people may have won the recent election there's no official ECP notification yet.. As per reports, ECP will publish the notifications of successful candidates by 21 Feb 2024. Furthermore, the results of many seats are being challenged in court due to allegations of rigging. It would be premature for us to declare those individuals as MNAs. Saqib ( talk) 21:20, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep: Once there is at least one reliable source reporting the successful election of a Member of Parliament, they are notable per WP:POLITICIAN. The nominator themselves has done the same in previous elections. All these individuals have been elected Member of Parliament per reliable sources except Salman Akram Raja who has general notability. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 21:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I repeat what I wrote on your talk page, just because a mistake was made in the past doesn't justify repeating it. You must present a single reliable source that explicitly states "Mirza Akhtar Baig or others have been elected as members of parliament." I feel its very important to await the official ECP list of notified members before proclaiming them as winners solely based on election results. -- Saqib ( talk) 21:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Dunya News source is in the article which states Mirza Akhtar Baig has won – all of these articles has a reliable source declaring the subject as having been elected – as far as the challenge is concerned, the challenges keep happening months later that does not mean that we should hold off for months and no, that was not the mistake, it was your consistent behavior throughout past elections, you used to start creating articles as soon as any network reported a winner. You created hundreds of articles that way. And per WP:POLITICIAN, you do not need official ECP notification, one reliable source is good enough. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I reiterate official notifications from the Election Commission of Pakistan are crucial before creating BLPs on individuals under WP:POLITICIAN.-- Saqib ( talk) 22:18, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

You are entitled to your opinion which used to be different during previous elections. Per WP, any reliable source is good enough, you do not need official ECP notification. Yes, if official notification is contradictory later on then the article can be nominated for deletion. As per this moment, these individuals are all elected per WP:RS thus notable for an article. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 22:39, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep: Per above Codenamewolf ( talk) 22:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep: Per Above CSMention269 ( talk) 09:52, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep: The nominator cites WP:NPOL but seems to have missed the sentence that states This also applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them. Curbon7 ( talk) 04:43, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Curbon7: The BLPs were created based on the provincial election results. The election body has yet to release a list of MNAs elected to the assembly, officially confirming their status as elected lawmakers. The process of taking the oath and assuming offices occurs afterwards. For example, 2018 general election were held on 25 July, but ECP notified the final results on 7 August and issued a list of the MNA-elect and then on 13 August, MNA's-elect took oath and assumed office. I say let the election body notify official results & then we're safe to create BLPs under WP:POLITICIAN. -- Saqib ( talk) 10:06, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Major networks in the country have declared these individuals as winners, per WP:RS, we are safe to create articles, if there is a contradiction in ECP notifications then articles for those individuals can be nominated for AFD, that will need to be decided on case by case basis. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 11:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep all satisfy WP:NPOL; no community consensus that considers prouncements of election commonissions the *only* reliable source. Definitive, yes, but not in exclusion of all others. No prejudice to renominate individuals not subsequently reconfirmed by the EC as elected. Regards, -- Goldsztajn ( talk) 22:03, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep In general, WP:NPOL does cover candidates who are elected but have not yet taken office. That said, we have deleted articles of individuals whose election are overturned and who have not taken office. But, unless or until that happens, we should rely on the RSs, which can include preliminary election results. -- Enos733 ( talk) 18:18, 14 February 2024 (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.