Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M S Khan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Nominator withdrew and there were no other opposing opinions. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] M S Khan
Unsourced vanity article on non-notable subject. Though a few grand claims are made, none is substantiated and there is no evidence that any will ever be substantiated. Aditya(talk • contribs) 17:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- Keep- According to this ref+ (http://www.balid.org/mskl.html#note01 and its 13th paragraph), he's the father of Library and Information Science in Bangladesh and he also founded Library Science Descipline in Dhaka University. Furthermore, he received prestigious Swadhinata Padak (end of 11th paragraph). More information about Swadhinata Padak can be found here. The article needs to be complete rewrite.--NAHID 19:17, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. —Travistalk 19:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Father of Library and Information Science in Bangladesh? Is there any other source apart from the BALID reference that makes that lofty claim? The BALID site itself looks very much like a vanity site already (may even be a self published source), and it is certainly not "Independent of the subject" (WP:NOTE). The Swadhinota Padak google search, funnily, shows a complain about the award that it is being handed out to not-deserving parties as the second hit. Aditya(talk • contribs) 01:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Keep: Reference for the Swadhinota Padak (Independence Award) is also available here. Another "mention" of the significance of the contribution of the subject is seen here (read first 2 sentences). No matter how "criticized" the Swadhinota Padak is - it is still the highest honor given by a sovereign country (Bangladesh) and hence makes the receipient notable. To assume the website of an institution (BALID) which was established in 1986 as a self-published source of a person who died in 1978 is rather naive. Arman (Talk) 03:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- BALID is an institution? Sawdhinota Padak the highest honor in Bangladesh? The first rather seems like a club, and the second one of a myriad government awards in Bangladesh that begin big and die in whispers. The Daily Star link seems to mention the subject only in the passing. Talking of naiveté, iI am under the impression that self published sources may also include sources created by the editor who wrote the article. Aditya(talk • contribs) 08:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- For reference on Sawdhinota Padak (Independence Award) being the highest honor given by Government of Bangladesh please consult Banglapedia. It is still not clear, exactly what makes BALID a self published source, "NOT independent of subject" etc. Arman (Talk) 09:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- The Banglapedia link (which is dated anyways) didn't verify. Speaking of clarity, I am under the impression that BALID is a not-professional group (the members may be professionals, but the group isn't) of not-verified authenticity, and the subject apparently was a big-shot of the group. That makes it "NOT independent of the subject", i.e. not third-party (you could probably ignore that if it was a strongly reliable source). "Self published source" is a suspicion, not a confirmation (no need to go too hung-up on that). It just looks like that one or more of the people who created that page has created the article (WP:COI), and that's how it may be a self published source. Do you require any more clarifications? And, oh! Can't locate a source, apart from BALID, that says the subject was a recipient of Sawdhinota Padak. Aditya(talk • contribs) 11:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Banglapedia link didn't verify what? It describes Independance award as the highest state award introduced by the Government of Bangladesh in 1977 in memory of the valiant martyrs in the War of Liberation. - what else are we trying to verify here? I earlier provided a link from The Daily Star confirming the Independence Day award of M S Khan. In case that was not clear, it is again here. Last but not least, the subject cannot be a "Big-shot" of BALID because he died before this Institution/club/group was formed. Arman (Talk) 11:50, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- The Banglapedia link (which is dated anyways) didn't verify. Speaking of clarity, I am under the impression that BALID is a not-professional group (the members may be professionals, but the group isn't) of not-verified authenticity, and the subject apparently was a big-shot of the group. That makes it "NOT independent of the subject", i.e. not third-party (you could probably ignore that if it was a strongly reliable source). "Self published source" is a suspicion, not a confirmation (no need to go too hung-up on that). It just looks like that one or more of the people who created that page has created the article (WP:COI), and that's how it may be a self published source. Do you require any more clarifications? And, oh! Can't locate a source, apart from BALID, that says the subject was a recipient of Sawdhinota Padak. Aditya(talk • contribs) 11:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- For reference on Sawdhinota Padak (Independence Award) being the highest honor given by Government of Bangladesh please consult Banglapedia. It is still not clear, exactly what makes BALID a self published source, "NOT independent of subject" etc. Arman (Talk) 09:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Independance award? You mean the Independence Day Award? Sorry, I missed, as I was looking for the Sawdhinota Padak. But, I am sure these two are the same. Look, BALID (an already barely notable organization) runs a trust in the name of the subject (check), and in no way is acceptable as an independent reliable source (as opposed to "not independent of the subject"). The subject may have died centuries before the organization was formed, but that doesn't change Wikipedia policies. Those little holes you are poking in my comments are not changing that fact either. Asserting notability on that the basis of that cite alone looks really far fetched. Especially when the subject's claim to fame is Father of Library and Information Science in Bangladesh. Such a grand claim must have at least a bit more substance. Otherwise the subject becomes "a recipient of the Independence Day Award (or should it be Independence Award?) for contribution in the area of education, especially in making libraries." There ends the story. Looks like prefect material for a "List of Independence Day Award recipients" article, not an independent one. Aditya(talk • contribs) 13:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have to disagree. The subject is notable and deserves an article on wikipedia, for the following reasons:
- 1) Example of coverage from Independent Secondary sources: [1], [2],
- 2) The subject won Independence Day Award by Bangladesh Government (The highest award in Bangladesh) in 2004.
- 3) The subject is frequently quoted in scholarly literrature on Library and Information science in Bangladesh. UNESCO database returns 2 results [3], "LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE LITERATURE IN BANGLADESH: A BIBLIOMETRIC STUDY; Khan, M.S.I, et al.; Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, Vol.3, no.2, December 1998: 11-34" lists 12 articles [sl# 182-193] [4].
- 4) The subject was the first President of Library Association of Bangladesh, and is regarded as the "The father of Library and Information Science in Bangladesh" by Bangladesh Association of Librarians, Information Scientists and Documentalists i.e. BALID. Arman (Talk) 04:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have to disagree. The subject is notable and deserves an article on wikipedia, for the following reasons:
- BALID is an institution? Sawdhinota Padak the highest honor in Bangladesh? The first rather seems like a club, and the second one of a myriad government awards in Bangladesh that begin big and die in whispers. The Daily Star link seems to mention the subject only in the passing. Talking of naiveté, iI am under the impression that self published sources may also include sources created by the editor who wrote the article. Aditya(talk • contribs) 08:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Note Two different editors have removed the AfD tag from this article today. I have restored the tag. --Crusio (talk) 14:28, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Keep awards, award established in his name, deanship of major school, national offices--this is notabiity! The language needs to be turned down, but that's a minor editing consideration. DGG (talk) 01:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- Changed position to Keep and nomination withdrawn in context of the new information and sources. Nice work. Cheers everyone. Aditya(talk • contribs) 07:40, 15 January 2008 (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.
