Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noal Zaher Shah

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 delete and redirect to Muhammad Ali, Prince of the Sa'id. MBisanz ^talk 02:08, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Noal Zaher Shah[edit]

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

Yeah, I know royalty makes some people hot. This person seems to be unremarkable hello fodder. She got married and had children. Truly remarkable, not. Essentially, an ill-tempered WP:GNG TheLongTone (talk) 15:39, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article is a plagiarism of Muhammad Ali, Prince of the Sa'id, but this could have been fixed without starting an AfD. Instead a BLPPROD was removed 18 minutes after the article was created, so as to start an AfD. Unscintillating (talk) 05:36, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect The content contributor is not currently active on Wikipedia, so there is no immediate prospect of having an article here, including getting proper attribution and WP:V sourcing. No prejudice to incubation, re-creation, or to improvement of the coverage of the topic at the target article. Unscintillating (talk) 17:51, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 11:16, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT; this content is not suitable for inclusion at this time. No prejudice to recreation with RS. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:50, 22 January 2017 (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.