Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Hasan (writer)
I wavered on this, because I share DGG's view about the likely notability of the subject, and that keeping it in mainspace is the best way to encourage the needed work on it--but I'm also wary about an entry that has limited sources, a variety of language challenges (such as the numerous different transliterations of the subject's name, plus a different scholar in the same field with a virtually-matching name), and essentially only one editor currently working to interpret those, with that editor being quite new to Wikipedia and still learning the intricacies of how WP uses sources (as am I for that matter). That could add up to an entry that diverges from 's important guidance that multiple secondary sources are necessary "so that we can write a reasonably balanced article that complies with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, rather than representing only one author's point of view." Being certain of not misleading readers about something like the neutrality of an article is a higher priority to me than growing the encyclopedia. But after consideration, I believe the entry's claims (in the present draft--the previous one was a different story) are sufficiently limited that the clean-up tags suffice to warn readers about what may be the entry's present limitations; it does not need to be deleted to protect readers, and keeping it may encourage expansion of a valuable resource
— User:Innisfree987, 22:05, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:WHYN (Wikipedia:Notability)