Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tahir Hussain (politician)

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. Salvio 13:15, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tahir Hussain (politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:BLP and WP:GNG on multiple counts: WP:BLPCRIME (not convicted), WP:NPOL (only a councillor, not an MLA, so he's not notable). Also blatant violations of WP:BLP. SerChevalerie (talk) 12:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. SerChevalerie (talk) 12:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. SerChevalerie (talk) 12:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SerChevalerie (talk) 12:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Notable politician is defines as A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. Which is the case.--User:श्रीमान २००२ (User talk:श्रीमान २००२) 13:03, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • श्रीमान २००२, please see WP:NPOL and WP:BLPNAME. And the other points I have listed above. SerChevalerie (talk) 13:19, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• weal deletewhilst there seems to be some coverage it mostly seems to be about one event, and that is a criminal allegation. Really not a very notable minor political figure.Slatersteven (talk) 14:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - The AfC has also previously been declined by SamHolt6: Draft:Tahir Hussain Corporator. SerChevalerie (talk) 15:06, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete based on the spirit of WP:BLPCRIME and WP:BLP1E. This individual has substantive coverage, but all of it is related to an accusation of a crime, which he has yet to be convicted for. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:19, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I can't find single source from the article that is talking about him without making significant mention of Delhi riots. Currently we are better off with delete per WP:BLP1E. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 18:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete clear cut WP:BLP1E. (t · c) buidhe 20:23, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:BLP1E. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:26, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete Delete per WP:BLPCRIME. If convited I think we will have enough for this pol to pass GNG. I do not think he is notable on his own per WP:NPOL. Wm335td (talk) 22:41, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: based on WP:BLPCRIME and [[WP:BLP1E[[.   // Timothy :: talk  00:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non notable Devokewater@ 09:10, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - per WP:BLP1E, the Tahir Hussain case might be marginally notable at the point (although I'd recommend waiting taking WP:BLPCRIME into consideration) but the person himself does not meet notability. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 11:23, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
•  Disagree this article should be kept as Tahir Hussain is an important figure in 2020 Delhi riots and has enough press coverage and Crime list to have a Crime Template and he was also Member of the Legislative Assembly (India) from Aam Aadmi Party who later was thrown out of party for his involvement as a criminal Branstarx3 (talk) 15:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC) [reply]

• • Branstarx3, He fails WP:NPOL because he is NOT an MLA; he was just a corporator / councillor. Further, per WP:BLP1E, he does not have significant coverage outside of the riots and its investigation. SerChevalerie (talk) 15:38, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agree he was not MLA , but that should not be only criteria to decide his criminal records , also there should be reason that why this article should be deleted instead of why this should be kept. I see no reason for vice-versa Branstarx3 (talk) 15:43, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:CRIMINAL and his admit that he commited crime qualifies him for an article upon him also 2020 Delhi riots played a major role in Indian Political and Social issues that too during 2020 Delhi Legislative Assembly election also he has Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act upon him which puts him in list of notable Criminals who directed riots ( to cause civil unrest ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Branstarx3 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Again, all the points you have mentioned only gain significance if and when he is proved guilty in court. SerChevalerie (talk) 17:30, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Then how Kapil Mishra is mentioned in Delhi Riots if he is not even proved guilty in court? Why some people here are trying to defend tahir Husain from Delhi riots? He himself accepted that he was involved also HC denied his plea recently, he is in jail. Also some are involved in Proving "Jai Shri Ram" as a war cry !!! Why all these? There is not enough citations that proves this article should be deleted.

I disagree with deletion of this article. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Branstarx3 (talk • contribs) 13:04, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*  Disagree Tahir Hussain is highly popular and has been regularly covered in press, so much so that he is a household name. There are hundreds of news articles mentioning him. Being a corporator or MLA is not relevant here. There is no policy that says that any politician cannot have a WP article if he is accused in a crime. In fact, it is the other way around. What WP General Notability Guidelines indicate is that "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." Hundreds of news articles mentioning Tahir Hussain are itself evidence enough that article is merited. Also, the condition of WP:BLP1E is not met here "If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented." 2020 Delhi Riots are significant and individual's role is well documented. Sachin.cba (talk)

• • He has only confessed, that too in police custody. (As 331dot said, if he had legal counsel while in custody, they would have told him to never confess). Confessions can be retracted in court (or even rejected). The reason I keep mentioning WP:BLPCRIME is because no court has yet made any judgment or even mention about him. If and when they do, we can reconsider about this article. SerChevalerie (talk) 17:29, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*** WP:BLPCRIME mentions not to include material "For individuals who are not public figures". Tahir Hussain is an elected politician. WP:BLPCRIME mentions that "In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it." Hence, an article based on reliable sources on Tahir Hussain does not, in any way, violates WP:BLPCRIME. Allegation of involvement in riots by Tahir Hussain is noteworthy, relevant and well documented. Therefore, this article cannot be deleted. Sachin.cba (talk) 15:09, 15 August 2020 (UTC) [reply]

• • Agree,User:Sachin.cba makes more sense Branstarx3 (talk) 13:14, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I disagreed above with the interpretation of BLP1E but it seems that BLP1E is broader than what is being mentioned here. It also says "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event." Since the person has no coverage outside this, I agree with the possible deletion. Sachin.cba (talk) 12:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - WP:BLP1E, WP:BLPCRIME needs to be noted for adding any of this to the main article as these are just accusations / charges at this point and the person does not have widespread coverage outside of this. Ravensfire (talk) 15:15, 17 August 2020 (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.