Shafqat Baloch : I don't see sig/in-depth coverage.  While he received a military award, so have thousands of other soldiers, but that doesn't mean we should create biographies for all of them citing ANYBIO.  Fwiw- the bio contains WP:OR , contains PROMO, is unsourced and flagged for copyvio as well.  Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 15:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions .  Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 15:46, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 16:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: @ Saqib , I've readded some info removed over copyright after fixing it which goes into detail on his role in 65 war.  Waleed ( talk ) 16:38, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no SIGCOV in RS.  ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk ) 21:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No coverage in depth based on any independent or reliable sources thus it discouraged me from opposing the idea of D-Prod .  223.123.5.35 ( talk ) 00:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I'm sorry Saqib ; although I share with you that this article exists in a terrible condition and has a plenty of WP:OR , we can't deny the fact that it passes WP:ANYBIO and should be kept.  Nawaiwaqt has a detailed article of Shafqat Baloch dated 2 September 2019 , although not much Nation reports his death in more than a paragraph .  This should also be helpful .  His role has had a significant impact , as well.  signed, Aafi (talk) 07:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Aafi , OK, I value your opinion, but I'd like to point out that the coverage in Nawaiwaqt is a column, an opinion piece, by guest columnist Aslam Lodhi and the coverage in the other sources is either routine or trivial mentions, none of which meet the GNG criteria.  These sources can indeed be used for WP:V purposes but not suitable for establishing GNG, where the threshold is higher.  Anyway, I don't have anything more to add on this.  As for WP:ANYBIO, I've clarified my concerns above.  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 08:07, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Saqib , thanks for adding these two cents.  I did not say that these are enough for GNG but we have an established practice of SNGs and it is really not necessary that each and everything would pass GNG.  Those that don't are finely evaluated by SNG practices of which ANYBIO is one.  This subject has twice received a highest military award in their country and this is verified , and all that routine/minimal/short/whatever, information, is only helpful to support the claims.  GNG is just impossible for everything, and as you say, nothing else needs to be said.  If a thousand soldiers, authors or anyone else, pass any of our subjective criterias, it is really within our scope to have articles/short biographies of them created on this encyclopedia, or otherwise just collectively cancel all of these subjective criterias, if we don't want to.  signed, Aafi (talk) 09:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  19:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:NBIO and WP:GNG.  All sources have no in-depth coverage.  AmericanY ( talk ) 07:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Isn't this an evidence of SIGCOV.  A twice award recipient of the third highest military honor is notable.  What is it with this deletion?  Is there anything am missing?  Sources seems to be offline.  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  22:23, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] There is seriously no problem.  The subject clearly passes a subjective notability criteria and GNG/SIGCOV is really not a thing here.  If we discard subjective notability here, I guess a huge bulk of articles would need to be wiped up and all ther subjective criteria's discarded.  signed, Aafi (talk) 18:11, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Subject passes WP:ANYBIO , He has received the Sitara-e-Jurat Award twice.  Youknow?  ( talk ) 15:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It has long been established that two third-level gallantry awards are not sufficient to qualify for WP:ANYBIO #1, even before WP:SOLDIER was deprecated.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 13:08, 4 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Significant coverage [36] enough to pass notability.  2404:3100:144D:486A:1:0:87B8:496E ( talk ) 06:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:36, 3 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Briefly mentioned in articles about the movie (source 7), but I don't find much of anything about this person otherwise.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] do you have a say on WP:ANYBIO, leaving aside coverage needed to pass GNG?  signed, Aafi (talk) 10:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Aafi , But we don't have a consensus that  WP:ANYBIO # 1 override the GNG requirement.  WP:ANYBIO also  says: Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included.  .  Fwiw, there's an ongoing debate about this issue at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#WP:ANYBIO at AfD .  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 11:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Saqib , thanks, this is something I was looking for.  Notability is always presumed.  WP:GNG also says it, "Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article. " However, thanks for the link and I believe the outcome of this AfD should consider the result of this discussion that you have linked. I'd be glad to change my opinion given where that discussion on WP:ANYBIO goes. signed, Aafi (talk) 13:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] lack of coverage is a lack of coverage, regardless of which notability criteria you choose. Oaktree b ( talk ) 22:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Aafi. Nawaiwaqt covered his death , Aslam Lodhi has covered Baloch twice ( [37] , [38] ) in Nawaiwaqt . Note, most of the coverage is in Urdu language and is clearly visible if someone searches with Urdu string ( "شفقت بلوچ" ) on Google Books there is a lot of coverage which is visible with snippet previews.  Some coverage in Phool visible here , some in-depth coverage here , this book describes him as a national hero in the visible snippet , this book says he fought alongside Aziz Bhatti - another national hero, this and this book describes how he fought the battle.  There is plenty available on Google Books to stitch together a detailed biography about him, so clearly meets WP:BASIC which says If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability ; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability .  Thank you.  5.30.172.24 ( talk ) 22:59, 9 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Owen× ☎ 07:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : He is also subject of a film .  -- Ameen Akbar ( talk ) 22:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] امین اکبر , OK, but does being subject of a film make someone qualify for a WP bio?  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 08:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep coverage in [39] [40] , [41] indicates notability.  As per The Nation , he was awarded Sitara-e-Jurat (third highest military award of Pakistan) twice [42] .  Libraa2019 ( talk ) 12:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] KEEP After reviewing the discussion above and all the reliable sources for this article, I am convinced this article is worth keeping...  Ngrewal1 ( talk ) 00:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus