Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rashid Saleem
the RfC that is so often mentioned made a conclusion re: SNGs that the recent RfC on PROF has concluded is not true and that directly contradicts the text of , the guideline which the GNG is a part of and subordinate to. The text of N has not changed because there was no RfC on changing it, and an RfC that was only advertised as being about one SNG cannot be a backdoor way to change the most prominent ''guideline'' on en.wiki. The SNGs are in fact ''equal'' to the GNG as is made abundently clear by the overaching notability policy. NSPORTs does subordinate itself to the GNG, but it is important to remember that the GNG is only one part of . POSSIBLE is also part of it, and passing NSPORTs gives that argument significantly more weight.{{pb}}It is up to the participants in a discussion to decide how they deal with this tension inside the guidelines. I have no opinion on this specific case, but I did want to point out that there is absolutely no basis in the actual notability guideline () to accept the call to ignore those arguing from an SNG. If the participants of this AfD decide that failure to comply with the GNG is a reason to delete the article, that is acceptable under both NSPORTS and N, but deciding to retain per NSPORTS and NPOSSIBLE is also entirely based in policy, and I urge the closer to discount arguments that claim otherwise
— User:TonyBallioni, 22:27, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:N||WP:NPOSSIBLE (Wikipedia:Notability)