- 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. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:55, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
- Shaukat Mahmood Basra ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
New, unreviewed, creation by a now-blocked spammer Macrolancer ( talk · contribs) / Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/IMZahidIqbal who is churning out biogs in what's an obvious paid editing scheme. Andy Dingley ( talk) 22:55, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 01:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 01:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Andy Dingley, I accepting I made some citation which is not suitable to Wikipedia. Get punished for 72 hours and learned a lot to never use such sites as the citation in Wikipedia. Will not do that again. There is no issue with this article. You can check the notability and verify references. Macrolancer ( talk) 08:22, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- This isn't about citations, it's about your use of multiple WP:SOCKPUPPET accounts. Andy Dingley ( talk) 08:41, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Andy DingleyThis is first time when I joined Wikipedia working. Macrolancer is my company name which I used to create my username here. How you have tagged me as WP:SOCKPUPPET? Macrolancer ( talk) 11:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep and flag for a neutrality check. Conflict of interest is not a deletion rationale in and of itself — it can be supplementary evidence in support of deletion if an article also has basic notability and/or sourcing problems in the first place, but it does not force deletion of an article that does have a valid notability claim and some appropriate referencing for it. In the latter instance, we keep the page and just clean it up — and as a former member of the Punjab Assembly who passes WP:NPOL on that basis, that's the situation we have here. Bearcat ( talk) 17:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 04:40, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Has been an elected member of the Parliament so meets basic notability, however few sources cited are unreliable. -- Saqib ( talk) 20:47, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. Verifiable Member of Provincial Assembly passes WP:POLITICIAN. Passable stub in its current state. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:08, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- 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.