Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raheem Kassam
What's the argument, here? Just because there is a lot written on the subject doesn't mean he is notable for a page on this encyclopaedia. The entire article reads like a Curriculum vitae, to whom is it beneficial that the subject has worked on a minor Presidential candidate's campaign? The reader or the subject? or that the subject has a position at antiquated think-tank? Why should we care that he worked briefly for the Taxpayers' Alliance? How is this individual notable enough for that information to be useful? From the beginning of this article, it looks as if it has been the victim of sock-puppeting - and even if it isn't - how is the subject notable enough to be on this encyclopaedia? Blog-posts or 'executive editors' (who normal web-masters would call 'Admins') of minor blogs have never been enough for an article entry. I recommend deleting. The entire page sounds like a marketing campaign for the subject and, by the style of the writing, most likely to have been written by the subject himself. I direct users to  and  for I believe these two issues are the one's at heart at deleting this page. Special:Contributions/78.40.152.129|78.40.152.129
— [[User talk:78.40.152.129|talk]]), 17:24, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:SOAP||WP:N (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)