Talk:Hafiz Abdul Basit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Nominated for speedy deletion under A7

This article was nominated for speedy deletion with the edit summary (not sure why this person is any more notable than the other 287 disappeared men...)

First, unless I am mistaken, nominators are discouraged from basing nominations for deletion on the existence or non-existence of other articles. Nominations for deletion are supposed to be based on the merits, or lack thereof, of the articles in question.

IMO extrajudicial detention is highly notable. IMO, detaining political prisoners is, itself, highly notable. IMO, keeping wrongfully accused men in detention, or men for whom a good case can be made that they are wrongfully accused, is highly notable. IMO, all 287 men merit articles of their own, provided they can be written from a neutral point of view, based on authoritative, verifiable sources.

This article was based on authoritative, verifiable sources.

Extrajudicial detention is a highly controversial topic. WP:CSD#A7 says:

"Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content. An article about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If controversial, or if there has been a previous deletion discussion that resulted in the article being kept, list the article at Articles for deletion instead."

So, A7 is not applicable.

Cheers! Geo Swan 11:34, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I also left a note on the nominator's talk page, reminding them that the third paragraph of WP:CSD says:

"Before nominating an article for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved or reduced to a stub; if so, speedy deletion is probably inappropriate. Contributors sometimes create articles over several edits, so try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its creation if it appears incomplete."

I asked them:

"Is there any possibility that you could consider following the recommendation of WP:CSD, and refraining from tagging articles within mere minutes of their creation? "

Cheers! Geo Swan 11:55, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I placed the speedy not based on the existence (or non-) of other articles, but on the notability of this particular person. Unlawful detention and the practice of "disappearing" people is certainly notable (and deplorable), but the article does not make clear why this particular person deserves an article any more than the hundreds of others who have suffered the same fate. However, I could have placed a notability flag which would have been a "lighter" comment and possibly that would have been a better choice. --Bookgrrl ^holler/lookee here 03:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The way I see it the hundreds of others, who suffered the same fate, all merit articles, provided we can write them, citing verifiable sources, and while complying with the wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, and other key policies.

Hafiz Abdul Basit's name was on a list of 287 disappeared. At the time I started his article I didn't know the other names. Since the article was tagged for speedy deletion, I have added another half dozen references, which listed half a dozen other names from the list. The way I see it those other half dozen guys also merit articles of their own, if articles of meaningful length can be written that comply with the wikipedia's core policies. IMO they too would be controversial, and the A7 requirement that they contain an explicit claim of notability would not apply.

At the time I wrote the article I didn't know why he was disappeared. No one told his relatives. The nominal justification came out before Pakistan's Supreme Court. He was said to be suspected of involvement in a plot to assassinate President Musharref.

I am going to return to this question, and state it more explicitly:

"Why shouldn't every person who has been subjected to extrajudicial detention, and every person who has been "disappeared", about whom an article of meaningful length can be written, that complies with the wikipedia's core policies, merit an article on the wikipedia?"

Cheers! Geo Swan 15:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)