Deletion of Ahmed Ziauddin (2nd nomination)

Comment: Substantial coverage in reliable independent sources for only a single event. Sourcing for rest of bio is scant, and doesn't meet the requirements of  or any other notability guideline. Since the material pertinent to Skype controversy has already been added to that article, there is nothing more to merge. The subject does not INHERIT notability from the event. Argument for keep boils down to , none of which is sufficient to establish notability, even if taken together. My own search turned up nothing even faintly promising
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SCHOLAR||WP:LOTSOFSOURCES)

Comment: It is clearly  and doesn't have sufficient information and reference to poetry AZ and it is full of the description of so called Skype controversy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per : "If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate." Both of these criteria appear to me to be met here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: This is not a true 1E. One give away for a real  is that you can ONLY find sources about the ONE event, but that's not the case for Ziauddin as he was also active, notable in fact, in the Asian ratification of the Rome Treaty. To treat him as 1E, you would have to completely write off the sources about his efforts on behalf of the treaty and further human rights work. Of course, he did play a major role in the one event where there are the most Internet hits in searches, and his role is in fact well documented in Bangladesh's Skype scandal. His conversations with Justice Huq made international news, and to give you an idea of how important this was in Bangladesh: one journalist wrote that it has been likened to the British News International phone hacking scandal
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Quoting from , "If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate." I think therefore the article conforms to Wikipedia policy and should be kept, although attention should also be given to the weight of the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: per  and Wikipedia:Notability (academics
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: content is already in the Skype controversy, this is a clear  and the arguments by the keep voters don't stack up, per things like . I would not describe this article as a stub, but as a start class, and citation count doesn't mean anything as a raw number. Some bits of this article seem a little bit more fluffy than they need to be, but not bad enough to need removing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: Very clear instance of . The size of that one event is not really of importance here, since the event itself was of such little importance
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: I disagree with Crtew's assessment on the grounds that while he is involved in the Asian ratification of the Rome Treaty, I can't find any reliable sources regarding that treaty of which he is a significant figure.  All of the sources that mention him fail to |provide significant coverage of the subject.  He also fails .  Right now I agree that  applies to this subject
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything (WP:42||WP:SCHOLAR||WP:BLP1E)