Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Munem Wasif

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 04:35, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Munem Wasif

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

According to the WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE guidelines the article can not be promoted. No WP:RS. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 13:18, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 13:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 13:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC) ~ Moheen ^(talk) 13:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Is this AfD some kind of joke, perhaps? At Word Press Photo, at Prix Pictet (yes, Prix Pictet FFS), at the Daily Star for an award, at the Daily Star for another award, essay at LensCulture (by Francis Hodgson, no less). What more do you want, Moheen Reeyad? -- Hoary (talk) 13:56, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:46, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep I agree with Hoary. With provided references this AfD shouldn't be even existing. Easily passing WP:GNG and definitely WP:CREATIVE. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 07:54, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:00, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep This is quite a notable, and, let's face it, spectacular photographer. Yes, the references could be improved, but a cursory search shows he is a very serious and notable photog. As Hoary points out, the essay on the lensculture site is by the head of photography for Sotheby's. Weird nomination. Should be withdrawn or Snow'd. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 23:07, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As HappyValleyEditor says, this is a weird nomination. Moheen Reeyad's failure to explain it is disappointing. And what does "the article can not be promoted" even mean? (That it cannot be promoted to GA? If this is so, then is the impossibility of promotion to GA presented as a reason for deletion?) -- Hoary (talk) 22:48, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This has been open for almost two weeks, with no delete votes or arguments. Time to close as Keep?HappyValleyEditor (talk) 23:01, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It is not weird to start an AFD nomination of the article per Wikipedia policy. Maybe you guys are taking this nomination personally and this seems weird also! I gave my opinion about the article on the above nomination. I have no problem if the article is stored. There are so many non-notable articles in the English Wikipedia. ~ Moheen ^(talk) 16:56, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable subject. Incoherent deletion rationale, which Moheen seems oddly proud of. WP:COMPETENCE is required here. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:ARTIST on the basis of the museum exhibitions and awards the subject has won. Mduvekot (talk) 16:08, 8 July 2016 (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.