User:Ngrewal1/sandbox

• Mian Sheharyar (composer)
• Master Inayat Hussain (composer)
• Safdar Hussain (composer)
• Wajahat Attre
• Hazeen Qadri
• Tufail Hoshiarpuri
• Baba Alam Siahposh
• Master Rafiq Ali (composer)
• Akhtar Hussain Akhian (composer)
• Bakhshi Wazir (composer)
• Wazir Afzal
• Lal Muhammad Iqbal (composer)
• Saifuddin Saif
• Agha G. A. Gul

Map of Pakistan, showing....custom-change your OWN TITLE here depending on your Wikipedia article at hand

http://www.thehindu.com/mp/2005/11/16/stories/2005111601160300.htm, 'Beat Street'- Review of Durbar-e-Khaas by Munawar Ali Khan, Volume 2,

• Getting started Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting help Frequently asked questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

  The community Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

  Mian Iftikharuddin

  Thanks User:Kautilya3 for sectioning off and expanding the article. The article looks much better now. I mean it sincerely. I think the article is balanced and fair now. Thanks again Ngrewal1 (talk) 21:33, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

  You are very welcome, Ngrewal1. Thanks very much for writing! A lot more work is still needed though.

  • We need to better explain why he got dissatisfied with Congress. It appears that he recognized that it was impossible to attract Muslims to Congress and hence left.
  • The Pakistan movement section needs to be expanded. There is more information in Self and Sovereignty.
  • The Pakistan Times section also needs to be expanded. See the Pakistan Times article and the citations there.
  • His role in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 is probably more honourable than our current write-up. General Akbar Khan is not such a great source.

  Kautilya3 (talk) 00:22, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

  Tagging articles

  If you don't have time to fix citations/references at the moment, you can still help by tagging the article so that others can find and fix them.

  • All articles with broken or outdated citations: Pages are currently added to this category by {{Cite web}} and {{Cite news}} if they use incorrect syntax. You can also tag articles with dead links by using {{citations broken}} (to tag an entire article or section) or {{dead link}} (to tag an individual link).
  • Articles lacking in-text citations: This category is filled by the {{No footnotes}} template
  • Citation style: Use the {{Citation style}} tag to put articles in this category.
  • Articles with unsourced statements: use {{Fact}} or {{Fact-now}}
  • Articles needing page number citations: use {{page number}}
  • Articles needing more detailed references: Use {{specify}}, to add an article to this category.
  • Articles lacking reliable references: use {{Primarysources}} or {{rs}}.
  • Articles needing additional references: use {{Refimprove}}, {{Refimprovesect}} and {{Unreferencedsection}}.

  
  

  Archiving Talk Pages

  Hello again, Just wondering...how do you archive your personal talk page? I tried following the steps as noted, but they seem really confusing to me. Thank you. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 22:56, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

  @PAKHIGHWAY: I let a bot do my archiving, so it's automated. If you edit my talk, you will see the source template at the top under User:MiszaBot/config. Just copy the code over to yours, and it should do it for you. Mar4d (talk) 05:39, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

  Abdul Razak Dawood

  Saqib, first you deserve credit for creating this article on 21 January 2017. All I did yesterday was to try to expand it a little bit with a reference to a recognized solid business news website Bloomberg.com. I am trying to be courteous to you, rather than revert you as you did to me, and first ask you a question on your Talk page here. I am just curious as to why you removed some of my added lines when they are clearly backed up by Bloomberg.com website. For example, Bloomberg.com website says that he is a "Director of Pakistan Business Council from 2013 – present" and also the Chairman of Descon Limited. In case you were in a hurry and did not click on the Bloomberg.com website link 'Read Full Background' given below the 'Partial Profile Background' shown on their website, then you apparently missed seeing those extra lines that I am talking about? By the way, I do remember you fixing one of my Dawn (newspaper) links for me couple of months ago and I did appreciate your help (it was my fault and all of us make mistakes occasionally). I am just asking you to take another look at Bloomberg.com website's Profile of Abdul Razak Dawood. Thanks Ngrewal1 (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

  @Ngrewal1: I really appreciate you taking the time to write me. It was mistake on my part and I instate the material that I removed. --Saqib (talk) 15:42, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

  @Saqib: Thanks Saqib, that's nice of you. We are both working for the same goal - to try to improve Pakistan-related articles on Wikipedia. Ngrewal1 (talk) 16:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

  Proposed deletion of M. Akram

  

  The article M. Akram has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

  If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Saqib (talk) 04:57, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

  India quick links

  Pick up your useful India links here

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bhadani/Archive1 MARHOOM BHADANI TALK page ARCHIVES 2018

  History of Pakistan template

  For infobox use: image= caption = The Map of Line of Control

  Nagina Group

  Company type	Public corporation
  Industry	Textile industry Energy development International trading
  Founded	1972 (1972)
  Headquarters	Lahore , Pakistan
  Key people	Inam Ellahi Shaikh Shaukat Ellahi Shaikh Shafqat Ellahi Shaikh
  Revenue	Rs. 832 million, $100 million USD (FY 2006)
  Website	www.nagina.com

  Nagina Group is a Pakistani conglomerate company which is based in Lahore, Pakistan. It manufactures a wide variety of textile products.

  The company was founded in 1972 by Inam Ellahi Shaikh and Ashan Ellahi Shaikh. Nagina Cotton/Yarns (a subsidiary of Nagina Group) was listed by Forbes magazine as among the best-performing-companies with less than US $1 billion in revenue in 2003.

  History

  The Nagina Group began as a single company, Nagina Mills Limited, established by Shaikh Inam Ellahi and Ashan Ellahi Shaikh in 1967. Focusing on the production of cotton yarn, it grew with the acquisition of tanneries, factories that produced shoes and ice, and Pakistan's largest jute mill. These assets were lost, however, when East Pakistan separated from the Pakistani Federation to become Bangladesh in 1971. In 2006, Managing Director of Nagina Group, Shafqat Ellahi Shaikh was elected Chairman of All Pakistan Textile Mills Association.

  Nagina Group of companies

  The company restructured itself in 1972 as the Nagina Group, consolidating its assets under a single umbrella organization.

  The group currently manages these subsidiaries:

  • Nagina Cotton Mills Limited (Karachi) traded on Pakistan Stock Exchange with the trading symbol (NAGC)

  (Note: All the stock exchanges in Pakistan – Karachi Stock Exchange, Lahore Stock Exchange and Islamabad Stock Exchange were merged into Pakistan Stock Exchange on 11 January 2016. So the old and modified company trading symbols on all financial websites may not be updated yet)

  • Nagina Cotton Mills Limited and Prosperity Weaving Mills Limited are both member companies of All Pakistan Textile Mills Association
  • Ellcot Spinning Mills Limited
  • Prosperity Weaving Mills Limited (incorporated on 20 November 1991) - listed and traded on Pakistan Stock Exchange with ticker symbol PRWM. Mills location is in Sheikhupura District, Punjab, Pakistan. As of 2014, this production facility has 340 textile looms with annual capacity of 55 million linear meters of fabric. This company exports its products to customers in Europe, North America and the Far East countries.

  Together, Nagina Group facilities hold 85,416 spindles, 240 Air Jet Weaving Machines and produce forty-eight million pounds of carded and combed yarn annually.

  Nagina Group also operates three private power plants to provide electricity for its mills. The installed capacity of its generators is 30.57 Megawatts. Excess energy is sold to other industrial facilities in the area.

  Nagina Cotton Mills Limited is the flagship company of the Group, established in 1967. The company operates spinning machinery comprising 47,040 spindles with related textile processing machines. In 2014, the Managing Director and CEO of Nagina Group was optimistic about his companies " future business prospects for exports to the European markets."

  Nagina Group is active in the textile and cotton spinning, weaving, energy, real estate, and trading sectors in Pakistan.

  References

  External links

  • Nagina Group official website
  • Trading Symbol of Nagina Cotton Mills Limited on Pakistan Stock Exchange as of 18 July 2019

  Category:Manufacturing companies established in 1972 Category:Conglomerate companies of Pakistan Category:Textile companies of Pakistan Category:Companies based in Lahore Category:1972 establishments in Pakistan Category:Companies listed on the Pakistan Stock Exchange

  
  

  Nagina Group

  AfDs for this article:

  • Articles for deletion/Nagina Group
  • Articles for deletion/Nagina Group (2nd nomination)

  [Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

  • How to contribute
  • Introduction to deletion process
  • Guide to deletion (glossary)
  • Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

  Nagina Group (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)

  No progress from previous AfD, no new sources found. Fails to satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH. Those already present are not WP:RS as many are directory listings. Störm (talk) 18:09, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

  Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:16, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

  Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:16, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep In my view, the 5 references presently at the above article are reliable business websites – (Forbes business website), Dawn (newspaper), Business Recorder (2 references from the largest business newspaper in Pakistan), The News International (newspaper). I honestly don't understand how any one of them can be called a 'directory listing'? I also went ahead and updated all 5 references. This company is a notable company because one of its Wikipedia categories is …Category:Conglomerate companies of Pakistan. Ngrewal1 (talk) 01:45, 4 September 2019 (UTC) anyway.

  Comment Have you read the guidelines? Nowhere does it say that if references appear in "reliable business websites" then the topic must be notable. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:32, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

  Comment By the way, Prosperity Weaving Mills Limited (a part of Nagina Group) is listed on the Pakistan Stock Exchange. So a notable company due to this fact also. I also added 3 more newspaper references today. Ngrewal1 (talk) 20:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

  If there are analyst reports for Prosperity Weaving Mills, then that compeny would surely pass the notability criteria. But notability isn't inherited. Where are the analyst reports and references for this company that meet the criteria for establishing notability (see WP:ORGIND especially). HighKing⁺⁺ 14:33, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep Being listed on the stock exchange makes it a sizable enough company in Pakistan. Some more background on the textile subsidiary is mentioned by Business Recorder here. Mar4d (talk) 19:03, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
    • Response Mar4d, except *this* company isn't listed on the stock exchange. Also Notability isn't Inherited. Can you clarify again why you are !voting to Keep? HighKing⁺⁺ 14:32, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 15:18, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete. Things get a bit tough with cases like this, where we are not dealing with some obvious promo/spam attempt for a start up. It's a mid size company with ~50 years of history. But pretty please, we need sources that are not press releases, and that's all there is in the article. Google Books gives me a snippet " Nagina Group, one of the oldest textile groups in the country, consisting of Nagina Cotton Mills Ltd. Ellcot Spinning Mills Ltd and Prosperity Weaving Mills Limited" [1]. And that's all I am seeing in Books/Scholar. We have to face the fact that WP:ITSIMPORTANT is subjective and not a valid. In its half a century of a history, this company doesn't seem to have attracted any serious attention from anyone willing to write about that outside or passing mentions/press releases of 'business as usual'. Therefore, this is WP:YELLOWPAGES type of a fail. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:17, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete Excellent analysis by Piotrus above, summarised as "if, after 50 years, there aren't any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability, then it isn't notable". Nonsense arguments which are not based on our guidelines put forward by Keep !voters above. Topic fails GNG and WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 14:32, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

  Comment When Pakistan Stock Exchange website shows it's traded on their exchange, there is no doubt it's traded there!!! Other financial, national and international business websites, may not be updated yet.

  Again, when Forbes magazine lists this company as among the best-performing-companies with less than US $1 billion in revenue in 2003, we can safely assume this company already went through their evaluation process. Forbes website reference is at the above article.

  Then there are ASIANET Pakistan and 7 other independent newspaper and business website references at the article. Ngrewal1 (talk) 22:48, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

  Response Please read WP:NCORP. All of your sources fails this guideline and most of the arguments put forward against your references are grounded in those guidelines, especially WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND and the definition of "Independent Content". 1) This company is not listed on any stock exchange. A subsidiary appears to be but not this company. Also see WP:LISTED as being listed is not a guarantee of notability. 2) Being included on a list is specifically listed as "trivial coverage" and fails WP:CORPDEPTH 3) Not a single one of those references meet the criteria for establishing notability. Most are based on company announcements and mentions-in-passing. None contain "Independent Content" (as defined by WP:ORGIND). HighKing⁺⁺ 17:14, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

  Comment Let's be reasonable with each other here, please. I took your own above provided link subsidiary and used it to find out that both subsidiaries – Prosperity Weaving Mills Limited and Nagina Cotton Mills Limited of Nagina Group are shown being traded on Pakistan Stock Exchange on MarketScreener International website. Then just to improve the article further, I have even included your two references at the article. We all know that Nagina Group's subsidiaries are part and parcel of the parent company and I am sure the reputable Forbes magazine considered all those factors before giving its rating 'as among the best-performing-companies with less than $1 billion in revenue in 2003'. Anyway, let's not continue arguing over it and let the closing administrator decide what they want to do with this article based on facts and contents of this article. Ngrewal1 (talk) 01:39, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

  Comment It sounds like the only point of disagreement at this stage (hopefully my summary is not misrepresentative) is that you say that if the subsidiaries (they are listed, probably because there must be analyst reports although I haven't checked) are notable (generating revenues for the parent) then the parent is also notable. My position is that (as per guidelines) notability isn't inherited and the parent must be notable in its own right. You say notability is established through the Forbes article (implying the Forbes article meets the criteria for establishing notability). I say the Forbes article is "trivial coverage" (specifically, inclusion on a list - fails WP:CORPDEPTH) and furthermore contains zero information on the company (fails CORPDEPTH). Sure - let the closing admin make a decision. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

  September 2019

  Talk page message to Memon Kutiana Wala (Pak Army Zindabad) It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 15:27, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

  Thank you for pointing this :) will keep in my mind

  and please don't change the reliable source as the film is updated in global village space which is showing in google and has enough reliable source if you have problem regarding this article you can put that request in deletion tag. http://globalvillagespace.com/operation-swift-retort-pakistans-befitting-reply-to-indian-aggression/

  I was wrong when I claimed that the source did not mention the film - I apologise for that. The reason was that I had multiple tabs open at the same time, and looked at the wrong one. The source is still not independent (you may not have noticed this, but the text was written by the film's director!) so it does not show that the film is notable, but it's undeniably about the film. --bonadea contributions talk 16:16, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

  Filmdirector didn't wrote the article but submitted via blog it seems the article the news desk itself if you have seen the news desk author button. anyways it is a secondary source and not the optional one. Gulf news , the news , the news (newspaper) , something haute and brandsynario are reliable and few wikipedia page has those article.

  Thanks.

  
  Note to yourself, Nisar, you copied and pasted below part of your User page on 30 September 2019. Including this TOP LONG LINE below here, copy & paste it back on your User page, when you want to restore it. Paste it back BELOW the column of your templates on your User page. 30 September 2019

  __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

  Hello everyone

  I do this Wikipedia editing as a hobby. My location is Michigan, United States. A retired Pakistani-American, I have been living and working in the USA since 1966. Have been retired since 2006. My main editing focus is on 3 countries- Pakistan, India and the US. I am more familiar and knowledgeable about these 3 countries. Born in Ludhiana, raised in Faisalabad (Lyallpur) and Karachi. Have lived for over 50 years in Michigan and Ohio. Emotionally attached to wherever I have lived. I focus on improving the existing articles by looking for sources, references and expanding them.--- Ngrewal1 (talk) 20:44, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

  Use of revert tool

  Dear GorgCustersSabre, as a fellow Wikipedian and a fellow Muslim, I am asking you to re-consider your REVERT of my work on Sulaiman Nadvi. I spent some hours gathering information first and then many hours doing the actual editing work. I have been editing Wikipedia for 6 years now, so please don't treat me like a new guy. I also fully realize that you have been on Wikipedia longer than me. You should know and recall that I have NEVER REVERTED your work over these 6 years even though it only takes a few seconds to do so and it's so CONVENIENT! It has been my choice not to adopt a supervising and monitoring role on Wikipedia. My Wikipedia contributions over 6 years have been mainly Islam-related (mostly Muslim personalities) and Pakistan-related, and I believe supervising and monitoring other people's work is also badly needed on Wikipedia since it's the 5th largest website worldwide for daily internet traffic. All kinds of disruptors and vandals need to be stopped also. So both roles, yours and mine, are needed.

  Back to Sulaiman Nadvi, I had fixed and updated all the references. To my surprise, even the reliable Dawn newspaper reference was dead. So I searched for and replaced it with their NEW website for the same title, Myths about Urdu. With the reverted Sulaiman Nadvi article, as it is now, Dawn reference and salaam.co.uk references are dead now! Also Pakistan Post Office issued 'Pioneers of Freedom' commemorative postage stamp material and reference is gone for Sulaiman Nadvi and is deleted which he definitely deserves to have. Sadly, Pakistan Post Office does not maintain its website going back to 1992. So one has no choice but to use other available websites. Please make suggestions here or on my Talk page...Revert is not the only way to go. Either one of us can make the article better, hopefully. Ngrewal1 (talk) 19:59, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

  Dear GorgCustersSabre, I went ahead and fixed the dead Dawn newspaper reference plus used the Archived Open Library (California State Library) reference. Sulaiman Nadvi article now has more reliable sources. Thanks Ngrewal1 (talk) 16:29, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

  Nathoo Khan (1920 - 1971) was a sarangi player from Pakistan.

  Early Life

  Khan was born in 1920 in Amritsar.

  Career

  Khan first learned sarangi from his uncle Ferozdin and other family members. Later he became a disciple of Ahmadi Khan and Maula Bakh. He was also a staff artist at Radio Pakistan and has accompanied great vocalists of his time including Bade Ghulam Ali Khan, Nazakat and Salamat Ali Khan, Ashiq Ali Khan, Roshan Ara Begum and Umeed Ali Khan.

  Death

  Khan died in 1971 at the age of 51 in Lahore.

  References

  Informational notes

  Citations

  
  

  
  

  Umrao Bundu Khan (1915 - 1970) was a Pakistani sarangi player.

  Early Life

  Khan was born in 1970 to renowned sarangi player Bundu Khan. He learned vocal music from his uncle Chand Khan, a lagend of the Delhi Gharana.

  Career

  In 1970 Khan emigrated to Pakistan. He was a staff artist at All India Radio and was also a performed at Radio Pakistan. In 1954 he was invited to Akhil Bharatiya Khadi Pradarshini in Karachi, where he gave many concerts. He performed in Pakistan as well as in other countries. Khan was also a versatile singer, who sang mostly khayal, thumri, dadra, tarana, qaul and kalbana.

  Death

  Khan died in 1970 at the age of 55 in Karachi

  References

  Informational notes

  Citations

  
  

  
  

  Ghulam Mohammed Khan (1910 - 1974) was a Pakistani sarangi player.

  Early Life

  Khan was born in Hoshiarpur in 1910 family of sarangi and tabla players.

  Career

  Khan first learned sarangi from his father Bahadur Ali. After the death of his father he continued under his uncle Ghulam Hussain Khan and also under well known sarangi player Mamman Khan, uncle of Bundu Khan, and Raheem Bukhsh Shamapuri. He has accompanied great vocalists from Pakistan such as Nazakat Ali and Salamat Ali Khan and Amanat Ali and Fateh Ali Khan.

  Death

  Khan died in 1974 in Lahore at the age of 64.

  References

  Informational notes

  Citations

  
  

  ZOOMABLE GOOGLE MAP OF PAKISTAN AND INDIA - expands and shrinks to show all details of cities. Left double-click MINUS AND PLUS on the small BAR on the MAP to zoom in and out.

  Baitul Mukarram Masjid in Urdu (بیت ال مکرّم) is the second largest mosque of Karachi , it is located in Block 17 Gulshan e Iqbal , Karachi. It is near Urdu University and Expo Center Karachi.

  Baitul Mukarram
  Location
  Location	Gulshan Iqbal Karachi
  Location in Karachi, Pakistan Ngrewal1/sandbox (Pakistan)
  Geographic coordinates	24.9073634°N 67.0827195°E / 24.9073634; 67.0827195

  History

  Baitul Mukarram Masjid has an Islamic educational institute within the mosque, where students can get Islamic education.

  From the published pictures of the mosque, it looks clean , large and beautiful and it is under the administration of Darul Uloom Karachi. Large number of people come in this mosque to attend the Marriage in Islam ceremony or Nikkah ceremony of their loved ones. Amir Shahab was a 'Khateeb' ('Administrator') of this mosque but he was shot dead by unknown terrorists near Nipa Chowrangi , Karachi on 22 March 2019, Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani was with Amir Shahab but Mufti Taqi Usmani survived the attack..

  References

  External links

  • Jama Masjid Bait ul Mukarram | Gulshan Iqbal | Karachi], Youtube video

  Category:Mosques in Karachi Category:Mosques in Sindh

  
  

  Baitul Mukarram Masjid (Karachi)

  [Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

  • How to contribute
  • Introduction to deletion process
  • Guide to deletion (glossary)
  • Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

  Baitul Mukarram Masjid (Karachi) (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)

  Unrelated coverage/references. Nothing notable in reliable sources. Fails WP:NORG. Störm (talk) 07:10, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

  Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:39, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

  Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:40, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Merge. [was "Keep"] Assertion, not challenged, is that this is the second largest mosque in Karachi, the biggest city in Pakistan, which is a major assertion of importance. The deletion nomination is incoherent, as far as I can tell, and has no complete sentences. I interpret its sentence fragments to mean that the nominator views some or all sources in the article as including unimportant/unrelated information, which is not a reason for deletion. I interpret it to mean the nominator sees none of the sources as being reliable, also not a reason for deletion. I take it that the deletion did not perform wp:BEFORE and has no idea whatsover about the actual availabiltiy of reliable sources available in English and Urdu and other languages. Please speak up further, nominator, but otherwise this is frankly suitable for a "Speedy Keep" due to an invalid nomination. If the nominator won't express themselves in sentences, I highly doubt they did adequate other work (and do they speak Urdu by the way?) I will refrain from asking if they speak English. :) (Hey, please take that last sentence lightly, as intended.) --Doncram (talk) 20:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

  I rather assume this is a notable topic comparable to Baitul Mukarram National Mosque, in Bangladesh. It would be like deleting St. Patrick's Cathedral (Manhattan) and literally hundreds of other New York City church articles in Wikipedia, because they are all smaller than the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. Actually there are articles on more than 100 Catholic churches covered in Manhattan alone (see Category:Roman Catholic churches in Manhattan), much less all the other Christian denominations and times 5 boroughs. Here's a non-sentence for y'all: So literally thousands. --Doncram (talk) 21:08, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

  Try also searching on "Jamia Masjid Bait-ul-Mukaram", which is how it is labelled in Google maps. And there are no doubt other spelling variations and complete name variations, also. --Doncram (talk) 21:12, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

  And pics at Beautifulmosque.com webpage about the mosque, which is a reference already in the article but ignored, establish notability 1,000 times better than words, too. Really, User:Störm could you please just withdraw this nomination? --Doncram (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

  Maybe i was too strong/harsh about that. --Doncram (talk) 21:55, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep. Thank you @User:Doncram you're right as i am also from Karachi and bait ul mukarram masjid is not far from my house it is second largest mosque in karachi after New Memon Masjid (i have also created an article on new memon masjid). Bait ul mukarram is also mentioned in many news website and if you search Mufti taqi usmani you will get to know he is Ameer of that mosque. i don't understand why you are nominating my pages for deletion continuously sorry to say instead of deleting the page you could have improve it just the way you have created few pages recently. i will also add User:Ngrewal1.

  And sorry to say i have seen you're nominating AFD mainly from pakistan and daily you nominating 5 pages on average please don't do it wikipedia is a encyclopedia if pages have no or few reference it will get better in future or pakistani editors will do it.i am dissapointed unfortunately and i was planning to create few wikipedia this week but after i see you're deleting everything than i decided not to create any more article. anyways i am creating and adding more reference also will add reference in urdu language because bait ul mukarram has been mentioned in almost every newspapers of Pakistan.

  here is latest reference i added "Daniel pearl kidnapping and foreign policy" US Magazine (slate) ( Todd, Asra Q. Nomani, Kira Zalan and Barbara Feinman. "Snoopy Ice Cream Parlour and the real story of Daniel Pearl's kidnapping". Foreign Policy. Retrieved 2019-12-04.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) ) has mentioned Bait ul mukarram masjid karachi.Memon KutianaWala (talk) 09:44, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

  Well, to be fair, User:Memon KutianaWala, that reference provides only a passing mention and does not provide any description or history or any other substantial content actually about the masjid itself. The only information it might provide is negative actually: it is named as a place where a terrorist said they have met another terrorist, but that information is not exactly helpful and you didn't put an assertion about terrorism association into the article. Attaching the reference in the front of the lede after the first two words "Baitul Mukarram", along with 5 other references attached there, doesn't help. I guess we can all say we believe that the masjid exists. What is needed to establish the topic's notability for Wikipedia is a few reliable sources actually providing substantial content about the masjid. It is nice but not necessary for a source to be _primarily_ about this place (which this new source is not); it must however provide substantial information about it (which this source does not). This source could possibly be used in the article to support a new assertion about the mosque having association with terrorism, but actually I don't think it even does a good job of that. To make a negative assertion like that would require more substantial development and sourcing; from that one source alone I frankly do not believe, myself, that the mosque is substantial in terrorism. It would be like saying, just because two muslim persons happened to say hello to each other in front of St. Patrick's Cathedral (Manhattan), that St. Patrick's is important in Islam.

  Also, I mean this as helpful feedback to you, the placement of all references in the current article does seem to suggest that none of them support any substantial information about the mosque. The first seven references follow the second word in the article, as if to suggest they just support the existence of the mosque. Then it looks like four references look like they support the idea that a Mufti (whose association with the mosque is not explained) was with an administrator of the mosque at some other place, when the administrator was killed by terrorists somewhere else, while the Mufti was not killed. And the placement of the last reference suggests it supports the fact that some police and a driver were killed by the terrorists at the other location. I am not sure whether the killing of the administrator would go towards establishing terrorism association of the mosque; is that what you mean to suggest?

  So, while offhand I tend to believe you that this is the second largest mosque in Karachi, that appears not to be directly supported by any source, so far. Nor does anything else about the mosque itself, besides its existence, appear to be supported, given how the article is currently written. I do still tend to believe that there must exist some sources out there, somewhere, actually describing the mosque (its architecture, its layout, its size) and its history (when was it built, was it the first mosque of the muslim group which built it or not, etc.). It is fair of the deletion nominator, or any other Wikipedia editor, to request that you develop the article better, if it is not to be deleted. Could you possibly please do that? And/or, relating to the question of notability of the mosque, could you here point to any sources which you know of which do seem to actually support notability? sincerely, --Doncram (talk) 14:46, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

  Hi i could to it better if its not deleted i will add 5 references but they are in urdu language. BBC urdu ( سہیل, ریاض (2019-03-22). "مفتی تقی عثمانی قاتلانہ حملے میں بال بال بچ گئے". Retrieved 2019-12-04. ) has also passing mention of bait ul mukarram masjid but in urdu. i have also mentioned in article that mufti taqi usmani is amir of mosque also mufti shahab.Memon KutianaWala (talk) 15:00, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

  I removed statements about the mufti to the Talk page. Though perhaps it may be something valid to say, that a given person is or was a mufti of this mosque, if given with supporting reference. However that is still not really saying anything much about the topic of the article, which is the mosque. Is this person more important for something else, i wonder. Note it is not encyclopedic to list the names of staff of a school, say, at an article about the school, it doesn't really help readers know anything. We already could assume that staff exist, and they have names, we don't need to be told what the names are, usually. --Doncram (talk) 21:55, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

  After bbc urdu i have added two more references one is from urdu magazine talking about bait ul mukarram masjid and surrounding and one from urdu news website. any urdu editors are welcome to check :)Memon KutianaWala (talk) 15:07, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep Obviously this article is about a place of worship. I personally am satisfied with the existing large number (15 references) of reliable newspapers plus Pakistani TV channel news website references already there. In my view, it meets Wikipedia notability requirements.Ngrewal1 (talk) 19:03, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

  Thanks, User:Ngrewal1, but note that Wikipedia does not accept articles about any and every place of worship. Just like we do not want articles about every restaurant, say every McDonald's location which can be found on a map. Is there anything significant about this mosque. It was previously asserted in the article that the mosque is the second biggest in Karachi, which impressed me, but someone else removed that, so now there is no assertion of it having any importance at all. Could you help identify any factual statement about the mosque, at all, which is supported by any of those sources, and could be included in the article? Besides that it is a place of worship and it has a location. --Doncram (talk) 22:03, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment By the way, I have tried to improve the existing references and also have added a related template about 'Mosques in Pakistan'. Hope this helps. Ngrewal1 (talk) 01:23, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

  Comment - Most of the coverage is only helpful to verify the mosque, but still no sources verify the claim of 'second-largest mosque'. Still fails WP:SIGCOV. Störm (talk) 09:48, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

  No problem, Störm, that claim can easily be taken out which I did just now. Ngrewal1 (talk) 14:25, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment. I just removed the majority of the article and its sources to its Talk page for discussion. Besides some interpretation by a Wikipedia editor about some photos, which is not valid to be included in an article, the content removed said nothing about the mosque. User:Störm is correct to be concerned about this article. Even without any sources supporting anything, I still tend to think it is a valid topic. But Storm is right that the content, before and after my last change, actually provides no supported information about the mosque, besides the fact of its existence and location (which anyone can know from looking at a map). The contributing editors here need to learn/understand that substantial information, supported by specific sources, needs to be provided. There has been mention of sources in Urdu, which could be acceptable. Sources do not have to be in English, and they do not have to be available online. But they do have to say something substantial about the mosque, they cannot be merely passing mentions having no actual information about the mosque.

  By the way, is there a more substantial article in Urdu language Wikipedia or any other version of Wikipedia? --Doncram (talk) 21:48, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

  Hi This is the offical website of Darul uloom karachi and they have mentioned about "bait ul mukarram masjid" they are explaining when the mosque was built and on how many acres and students get islamic education and many other details: "جامع مسجد دارالعلوم کراچی | جامعہ دارالعلوم کراچی" (in Urdu). Retrieved 2019-12-06.. --Memon KutianaWala (talk) 08:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

  From Google translation of that webpage, it appears to me that the following passage is about this masjid. The webpage covers 4 mosques managed by a university of Karachi, and the passage is: "This mosque has a special status in the mosques of Karachi because of its breadth and style. The mosque and its associated area covers about five acres. There are several sanctuaries in the compound of the mosque Baitul Mukarram. There are five teachers and about two students are studying. There is also a seminar for academic talks; some teaching classes have also been started (up to Rabiya), as well as the Darfalafa and the center of Al-Aqsa al-Islami. Two sectors also serve their own useful service."

  I am not sure that is all about the mosque from that webpage, because transitions between covering one vs. another are not clear to me. However, yes, that is some detail. It would be nice to know what about its "breadth and style" give it "special status", and more about what that means. Also there is no mention of this being the 2nd biggest mosque in Karachi (an assertion already dropped from Wikipedia article); one of the others covered at the webpage seems to be more important and/or bigger, and perhaps there are other mosques not associated with the university which are bigger. Anyhow, this webpage's assertion of some importance for this mosque perhaps suggests that more information about this mosque might be available somewhere else. --Doncram (talk) 00:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

  Its 9th day completed and 10th day is started so can someone delete this tag ? as it has all the information updated and i will occasionally update more.Memon KutianaWala (talk) 17:53, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
  Relisting comment: Although there are several "keep" arguments and none aside from the nominator's to "delete", it is not been established beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is indeed the second-largest mosque in Karachi, nor that in-depth, independent coverage from reliable sources exist. It seems likely that this could be clarified, and then I think consensus could be readily reached.
  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:34, 9 December 2019 (UTC)Baitul Mukarram Masjid (Karachi)

  'Comment: To User:78.26, thanks, that is a fair summary. I am guessing that no participant here is going to provide substantial more information though.

  As an alternative to deletion (wp:ATD), which we are supposed to look for, perhaps the mosque is or could be covered in List of mosques in Pakistan, and the article could be redirected to that row (using an "id=" anchor for the row). There is a mosque there already named Grand Jamia Mosque, Karachi, which is supposed to become the world's 3rd biggest mosque. That is not this one, is it? It covers a mountain top, while I think this one is on the flat between flat boulevards. Merging this article to a row there, and redirecting to it, would be a lesser alternative to deletion of the article. If/when substantial sources and content do eventually emerged, then the redirect could be converted back to being a separate article, with its edit history properly showing early contributions. But maybe this mosque is not substantial enough to be included in that list of very substantial mosques. --Doncram (talk) 02:45, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

  In absence of substantial sources being produced, I change my !vote to "Merge", leaving a redirect behind: it seems to be verified as a mosque and a row for it can be created in List of mosques in Pakistan. --Doncram (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

  Doncram, there is nothing to merge. I also think this should be redirected. Störm (talk) 17:47, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

  I have added few references and will add more in urdu too , the article is ok and have enough references now.Memon KutianaWala (talk) 08:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Yeah, but it still seems there is nothing factual to say about this place at all, much less enough to write an encyclopedic article. The English language sources are not about the mosque at all. For example the one sourced to dawn.com is all about some book's price, and towards the end there is passing mention " I had often seen the community police helping the elderly, women and children cross roads near the Baitul Mukarram Mosque in Gulshan-i-Iqbal and the Civic Centre." That is NOT ABOUT THE PLACE AT ALL. I assume all the Urdu language ones are useless also. No facts have been put forward. --Doncram (talk) 02:51, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep The nearest analogy is that we keep cathedrals, but not parish churches, unless they are historic in some way. It's hard for me to be sure of the equivalence, but it seems the importance of this is enough that it should go in the keep direction. DGG ( talk ) 10:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
    • But why do you think this is important, please? The English language sources do not establish importance. Given that the Urdu language sources are provided by the same editor, I think it is fair to dismiss them all as irrelevant. --Doncram (talk) 02:51, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  Mr Doncram please update your google translator or please let other editor understand the urdu language article is clearly passing everything and notable even bbc urdu has also passing nomination not only this foreign policy has also mentioned this mosque. i repeat again if you don't understand urdu and your translator is not good please leave it and let other editor understand as i have added enough references and urdu language references are of newspaper and blog and they are clearly telling about mosque and other detail there are more than 10000 wikipedia pages who have only one reference or two but they are active no one has put deletion tag to them because that kinds of article is created by "wikipedia admins or editors". this discussion is of pakistan and no one has said about 'deleting' as this mosque has been mentioned in newspaper and other blog and its notable.

  Memon KutianaWala (talk) 14:19, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  This is government of karachi website and its in english passing mosque also i am adding few more references.Memon KutianaWala (talk) 14:25, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  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.

  Pakistaniat

  [Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

  • How to contribute
  • Introduction to deletion process
  • Guide to deletion (glossary)
  • Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

  Pakistaniat (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)

  Dormant since 2011. Weak coverage in WP:RS. Fails WP:NWEB. Störm (talk) 19:41, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:11, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:11, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep This website is still useful in gathering references while editing Wikipedia despite the fact they are not adding much new material to it lately. I have been using it. Still they have a lot there that can be used.Ngrewal1 (talk) 15:44, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

  see WP:ILIKEIT. Störm (talk) 18:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

  For you User:Störm, I can similarly say WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Seriously though, in fact, I said above that the website is still useful to all Wikipedia editors because of what is still available on this website. Ngrewal1 (talk) 23:56, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 01:48, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge: In addition to the one reference on the article, I found another reference by BBC Monitoring through Factiva (Factiva BBCSAP0020071111e3bb00439) and one on the Boston Globe here. Unfortunately you need a Factiva account to view that one. I'm new to deletion discussions, so I do not know whether this would be considered trivial coverage per WP:WEBCRIT. So in my opinion keep if this is non-trivial coverage or merge with Adil Najam if it is trivial coverage.  Bait30  ^Talk? 04:33, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

  Comment In addition to the references mentioned above by  Bait30 , I took the time to add another 4 following references today:

  • The Guardian newspaper
  • U.S. National Public Radio website
  • Dawn (newspaper)
  • Boston Globe newspaper
  • Outlook (Indian magazine)

  Hope this helps. Ngrewal1 (talk) 18:54, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

  Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistaniat

  Pakistaniat: All Things Pakistan is a blog launched in 2006 by editor Adil Najam about cultural and political issues in Pakistan. It has been widely cited in both the Pakistani and Indian press, such as Dawn (newspaper) and Outlook (Indian magazine), and international newspapers and radio stations such as The Guardian and the U.S. National Public Radio.

  International news coverage of Pakistaniat.com website

  • In the aftermath of Pakistan Peoples Party's President Benazir Bhutto's assassination on 27 December 2007, the editor of pakistaniat.com (All Things Pakistan) website Adil Najam was interviewed by The Guardian newspaper to get his sentiments and comments about this event in Pakistan.
  • Adil Najam, professor of public relations at Boston University in 2007, was also contacted by Robert Siegel, a reporter at the U.S. National Public Radio (NPR) to get his views on Bhutto's assassination.
  • In early 2008, the blog received as much as 10,000 visitors daily.

  References

  External links

  • Official website

  PAY ATTENTION, USEFUL LINKS FOR YOU IN THE FOLLOWING Chowk.com:

  Chowk.com

  AfDs for this article:

  • Articles for deletion/Chowk.com
  • Articles for deletion/Chowk.com (3rd nomination)

  [Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

  • How to contribute
  • Introduction to deletion process
  • Guide to deletion (glossary)
  • Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

  Chowk.com (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)

  No significant coverage in WP:RS. Poor Alexa rank. Fails WP:NWEB. Defunct website. Störm (talk) 19:48, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep: Per sources on previous AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chowk.com which our nom. seems to have conveniently ignored. I'm fascinated what happened to the 2nd nomination. I'll try to work the citations on the article at some point if I get time. Beyond that point I'll shut up.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:50, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  Djm-leighpark, do you have any WP:RS or are you in habit of commenting keep because you like it. Störm (talk) 16:48, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment: It is ridicous to present this at AfD without having links to the previous AfD's. I suppose at least there was an indication this is the 3rd discussion ... though it might be the fourth.

  • Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Www.chowk.com (30 May 2005) Result Keep
  • Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chowk.com (30 August 2012) Result Keep (displayed above)
  • Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chowk.com (2nd nomination) (17 August 2017) Result Keep (Nom. seems to have withdrawn AfD ??? )

  Once notable always notable isn't it. Of course sources have now linkrotted from that era. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:06, 14 December 2019 (UTC) Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:34, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  No, you can re-nominate if you think article is not upto policies of WP, and somehow survived AfD way back when WP policies were not tough. Störm (talk) 17:10, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment: The nom. has previously been commented as doing WP:VAGUEWAVE when nominating AfD. Can the nom. please explain the problems with defunct website and enumerate and explain with specific figures what is meant by poor Alexa rank. Part of the issue with WP:NWEB is that the article fails to explain the historical significance of the site ... my impression is of reading the article is there is a reasonable attempt of the article to set the historical context. WP:RS seems sated by previous WP:AfDs and would the nom. please explicitly contest the sources presented there. If nom. does not do this within 48 hours I suggest moving to speedy keep if this is not reasonably attempted by that time. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:46, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  When the website was active then recorded alexa rank was 5,543,926 in October 2016 which is poor by any standard and it shows that site had a poor following. Now, when the site is defunct, there is nothing on Alexa rank. Störm (talk) 16:53, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  You joined on 29 January 2017, but still we have to explain everything to you like a newbie. Please, familarize yourself with WP policies. Störm (talk) 16:57, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  Ah now depends on a glass being half full or half empty. If there be 1,500 milllon websites say, and even 200 million active, that rank of 5million puts it in the top 3% does it not. And poor is a poor word and an emotive word here, it is not necessarily a competition. And be pleased explaining why you are choosing the 2016 Alexa rank when I presume the site was in the old-age stage of it lifecycle. On the May 2005 AfD an Alexa rank of 47,000 was mentioned, albeit unsubstantiated. Be pleased explaining this all to me. Of course I am hoping you have contacted the people from those previous AfD's now you can called their judgement to question? I present all the sources on the article and presented by the keepers at previous Afd's for consideration (Excluding any self referencing its own website). As you will have considered them during your WP:BEFORE you should have considered each individually so it should be simple to present each individually here so you are not simply doing a WP:VAGUEWAVE. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:29, 14 December 2019 (UTC) I presume you are now accepting satisfaction WP:NWEB as you have not mentioned it. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:31, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

  No source discusses website in-depth which we need per WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 18:06, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

  Unfortunately still a WP:VAGUEWAVE answer. Specifically list here the sources/links you've considered. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:27, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

  • courtesy ping to Störm, as Djm-leighpark raises valid arguments. —usernamekiran(talk) 15:25, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
  Relisting comment: Notability not being temporary explicitly has a carve-out for AfD discussions: While notability itself is not temporary, from time to time a reassessment of the evidence of notability or suitability of existing articles may be requested by any user via a deletion discussion. This article needs to demonstrate notability per WP:NWEB, WP:NCORP, WP:GNG or some other applicable notability guideline. So far this is lacking, however a single participant arguing delete is also not a consensus.
  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:41, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

  @Barkeep49: Am I the only git idiot enough or maybe with the nous enough to sort through dead links and bring existing sources to this site? I've done the minimum on the article to switch on url-status=dead where necessary. Can you please do a temp-undelete on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chowk.com (2nd nomination) for me, it almost certainly contains nothing useful but I'd like to know the page creator anyway. I'll sift through the existing AfD sources over the weekend as no one else can be arsed to do it. There's also a little precedents news sites in tricky areas are sometimes given a little slack by the community. Tough luck at WP:ARBCOM. Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:37, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Djm-leighpark, the page creator was Störm. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:21, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: Dredging through the AfD's I believe the following sources have been presented at the AfD's

  • Staff (17 October 1999). "World: South Asia - Pakistan: The view from cyberspace". BBC.
  • Press Trust of India (22 May 2009). "Indians, Pakistanis in pursuit of peace at chowk.com". Financial Express.
  • Jyoti (12 March 2002). "A borderless internet is bringing ordinary Indians and Pakistanis face to face". Rediff.

  In the current article the Chowk and Alexa articles will not count for notability etc and the ZNET citation is of seems only passing. The following citation on the article remains:

  • Cemendtaur, A.H. (26 July 2005). Akhtar M. Faruqui (ed.). "Community". www.pakistanlink.org.

  The problem is that while the nom. by default has claimed to checked these out a consistent failure to spefically identify the sources means I am reliant on WP:AGF that the nom has actually had the both the WP:COMPETENCY and also put in the effort to actually check them out as required by WP:BEFORE before the nom. did the WP:VAGUEWAVE.Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment: WP:BEFORE D.1 also expects a google books check. Yet at the top of that list for me there is Transforming Education for Peace edited by Jing Lin et. al. [2]. The whole of chapter 10 is devoted to Chowk.com.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:00, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

  @Barkeep49: I observe little discussion in the over 48/72 hours since I have explicitly presented the sources that should have been considered per WP:BEFORE. I observe the nom while on WikiBreak per their talk page has made (a small number) edits in the last 48 hours but has chosen not to return here and I see no evidence of the informing of previous AfD participants whose judgement was to a degree explicitly questioned by the nom. being informed of this discussion. While these sources in my view are sufficient for WP:GNG (and certainly not to be dismissed by a nom. on WP:VAGUEWAVE and would also note the google scholar link here shows page after page of references of Chock.com content being used in citations to support other credible reports and discussions, matching WP:WEBCRIT ([WP:NWEB]]) #1. I therefore call discussion to be closed keep. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:54, 23 December 2019 (UTC)