Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sai Khan

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 Speedy deleted by Ponyo (G5). (non-admin closure) Kharkiv07 (T) 14:52, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sai Khan

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

Delete. Fails WP:SOLDIER. Recipient of the 7th highest honor (Tamgha-i-Khidmat). As per WP:SOLDIER, only one time recipient of highest award or multiple time recipient of second-highest award are notable (in terms of awards). He has not held any high rank, nor played an important role in a significant military event or commanded a substantial body of troops in combat. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:08, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 11:15, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article quite clearly fails WP:SOLDIER. --Arbraxan (talk) 15:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No The article is about a Pakistani army officer. And hold the Tamgha-i-Khidmat the 7th highest award Of Pakistan Army. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.40.90.157 (talk) 15:22, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:SOLDIER, that's not good enough to merit an article. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 15:24, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 05:55, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 05:55, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 05:55, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails GNG. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:45, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural note I've deleted the article under G5 criteria as it was created by a sock account.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:16, 4 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.