421:
410:
Unfortunately its not something that counts but having worked in
Pakistan 15 years ago I'd agree by assertion that very little about Jinnah isn't notable but we don;t work by assertions. If it helps, my reading of the AFD was that it should be a keep but that it wasn't there yet so that extra source
471:
I'll rather that other editors review this because you do this without actually reading the content (and later claim it was not available to you only). I added them here after checking out contents that specify that this book is a notable biography specifically referring to this book as well as the
389:
The previous references I pointed out was a drive by look at the sources which I added to point out that multiple sources were available. I'll take another look and see what I can find online. But the book is really popular here in
Pakistan (for me it would be common knowledge - but I'll see what I
342:
This wasn't ripe for closure as the only detailed analysis of the sources suggested that we had one decent source and the keep side were falling to assertion rather then quoting policy. Further detailed analysis for uninvolved editors would have helped establish a clearer consensus and the
456:
1st source unable to tell due to snippet view only. 2nd source does not mention the book. 3rd source a single mention in passing. 4th source brief mention in passing. Again none of the sources go into detail. This is what you did on the AFD, a load of links which lead to exactly nothing.
296:
There are nothing "pointy" about this whatsoever. The article quite simply will never be expanded beyond the stub it currently is due to the lack of sources. It should be merged to the authors article and become a redirect if it is to survive at all.
411:
will make all the difference. If its a frequently quoted book then someone somewhere has written something substantial about it and we are, after all, only one away. Urdu commentary is fine if that's what is available.
430:
390:
can find to back it up further). One of the point I wanted to make from the news sources provided was, that many many authors take quotes from that book... that itself should count towards the notability. --
428:
180:
Non admin closure, it appears the closer quite simply counted votes and looked at the link bomb which was supplied by a keep vote. There are but one review for this book, as such it fails
426:
424:
343:
involvement of wikiproject
Pakistan should have been sought. This was absolutely not an acceptable NAC and at the very least this should be voided and reclosed by an admin.
163:
78:
says that "controversial decisions are better left to an administrator", in accordance with that guideline, I'm overturning the closure and relisting the discussion. –
244:
review, the nominator has made many previous unwise nominations (as one was termed by an uninvolved editor). I can give those diffs if action need to be taken. --
48:
34:
43:
151:
515:
is relatively detailed and dedicated to the actual book. And as TopGun said, and I said at the AFD, I feel point 5 of NBOOKS may apply as well.
380:
Cool, can you find us one really decent second source to make the need for a relist moot? Its fine if not an english language source.
172:
39:
432:, cover some details which can actually be used to add to this article. Also to note, that this topic covers the point 5 of the
276:
226:
21:
315:
No one agreed to that argument in that nomination and explanations were given to you (since it is a review of that). --
537:
462:
302:
196:
101:
17:
512:
436:
criteria where the author is of exceptionally high significance and can be accepted as notable on that alone. --
526:
487:
466:
451:
415:
405:
384:
375:
347:
330:
306:
282:
259:
232:
200:
90:
521:
121:
210:
regarding the closure. Although xe accused me of "counting !votes and looked at the link bomb", that is
458:
298:
192:
271:
221:
207:
516:
117:
70:
480:
444:
398:
368:
323:
252:
74:– Because this is a non-admin closure that has attracted serious criticism, and given that
433:
241:
181:
423:
which gets us multiple sources specifically referring to this book. These for instance
266:
216:
81:
75:
357:
412:
381:
344:
474:
438:
392:
362:
317:
246:
190:
published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself.
158:
144:
136:
128:
360:member and came to the Afd through that list. --
8:
100:The following is an archived debate of the
63:
7:
540:of the page listed in the heading.
420:Here's quick search of the title
28:
186:The book has been the subject of
536:The above is an archive of the
264:I have no problem with that. --
1:
527:17:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
488:17:09, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
467:17:04, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
452:14:28, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
416:14:09, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
406:14:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
385:13:53, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
376:13:37, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
348:13:29, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
331:11:59, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
307:11:56, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
283:11:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
260:11:40, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
233:11:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
201:11:23, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
91:17:40, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
563:
18:Knowledge:Deletion review
543:Please do not modify it.
107:Please do not modify it.
40:Deletion review archives
356:Just for record, I'm a
184:which is quite clear.
188:multiple, non-trivial
214:true at all. FYI. --
104:of the page above.
550:
549:
118:My Brother (book)
89:
71:My Brother (book)
554:
545:
524:
519:
486:
450:
404:
374:
329:
281:
279:
274:
269:
258:
231:
229:
224:
219:
206:This editor has
175:
170:
161:
147:
139:
131:
109:
88:
86:
79:
64:
59:12 February 2012
53:
49:2012 February 13
35:2012 February 11
33:
562:
561:
557:
556:
555:
553:
552:
551:
541:
538:deletion review
522:
517:
473:
459:Darkness Shines
437:
434:Knowledge:NBOOK
391:
361:
316:
299:Darkness Shines
277:
272:
267:
265:
245:
227:
222:
217:
215:
193:Darkness Shines
171:
169:
166:
157:
156:
150:
143:
142:
135:
134:
127:
126:
105:
102:deletion review
82:
80:
62:
55:
54:
51:
46:
37:
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
560:
558:
548:
547:
532:
531:
530:
529:
505:
504:
503:
502:
501:
500:
499:
498:
497:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
491:
490:
351:
350:
336:
335:
334:
333:
310:
309:
290:
289:
288:
287:
286:
285:
236:
235:
178:
177:
167:
154:
148:
140:
132:
124:
112:
111:
96:
95:
94:
93:
61:
56:
47:
38:
30:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
559:
546:
544:
539:
534:
533:
528:
525:
520:
514:
510:
507:
506:
489:
484:
483:
478:
477:
470:
469:
468:
464:
460:
455:
454:
453:
448:
447:
442:
441:
435:
431:
429:
427:
425:
422:
419:
418:
417:
414:
409:
408:
407:
402:
401:
396:
395:
388:
387:
386:
383:
379:
378:
377:
372:
371:
366:
365:
359:
355:
354:
353:
352:
349:
346:
341:
338:
337:
332:
327:
326:
321:
320:
314:
313:
312:
311:
308:
304:
300:
295:
292:
291:
284:
280:
275:
270:
263:
262:
261:
256:
255:
250:
249:
243:
240:
239:
238:
237:
234:
230:
225:
220:
213:
209:
205:
204:
203:
202:
198:
194:
191:
189:
183:
174:
165:
160:
153:
146:
138:
130:
123:
119:
116:
115:
114:
113:
110:
108:
103:
98:
97:
92:
87:
85:
77:
73:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
60:
57:
50:
45:
44:2012 February
41:
36:
23:
19:
542:
535:
518:Sergecross73
508:
481:
475:
445:
439:
399:
393:
369:
363:
339:
324:
318:
293:
253:
247:
211:
187:
185:
179:
106:
99:
83:
69:
58:
513:This source
208:messaged me
472:author. --
84:Sandstein
476:lTopGunl
440:lTopGunl
394:lTopGunl
364:lTopGunl
319:lTopGunl
248:lTopGunl
242:WP:POINT
182:WP:NBOOK
20: |
509:Comment
413:Spartaz
382:Spartaz
345:Spartaz
294:Comment
173:restore
137:history
76:WP:NACD
523:msg me
358:WP:PAK
340:Relist
273:music
223:music
159:watch
152:links
52:: -->
16:<
482:talk
463:talk
446:talk
400:talk
370:talk
325:talk
303:talk
254:talk
197:talk
145:logs
129:edit
122:talk
32:<
278:ian
228:ian
212:not
164:XfD
162:) (
22:Log
511:-
465:)
305:)
199:)
42::
485:)
479:(
461:(
449:)
443:(
403:)
397:(
373:)
367:(
328:)
322:(
301:(
268:B
257:)
251:(
218:B
195:(
176:)
168:|
155:|
149:|
141:|
133:|
125:|
120:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.