Talk:Shah Salim Khan

Edit restricted

The page is edit protected. required to remove permission

The editor making the edit request wishes to request a speedy delete as an attack page per his talk page. User_talk:Hassankhanonline#Help_required. I will not do this because the page was created as a promotional page for what looked like a sitting member of a regional parliament. When reviewing I discovered via other sources that he had been disqualified for defaulting a loan. I added this information and removed the unsourced promotional stuff. This person meets WP:NPOLITICIAN as a former member of a regional parliament. I would be happy for anyone to add any more positive information if it can be found. If someone else woshwi to request a g10 speedy delete feel free to do so. Dom from Paris (talk) 05:30, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 07:16, 6 October 2018 (UTC) (Non-administrator comment)

@Hassankhanonline: you need to specifically request that someone place a G10 speedy delete tag on the page when you make your edit request. You must explain why preferably with sources. As I said I will not do it myself as I disagree with you but if anyone with the necessary rights to edit this page is willing to do it I will not contest and allow an admin to decide. (N.B. This page has already been reviewed by an admin who placed the extended semi protect padlock on it). Dom from Paris (talk) 07:41, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

CSD

I've nominated this article for speedy deletion since it started as a mostly unsourced promo attempt later turning into somewhat negative article about a living person. I do not think that the subject is notable as yet. There's no indept coverage, and WP:GNG is not satisfied. Bare mentions in news do not make a personality notable.

Further, WP:NPOLITICIAN isn't satisfied two fold 1) because he is not a former member of the GB assembly rather a disqualified member. A former member is a person who has held the office in a previous term and the term has expired. This is the case of a disqualified member. So the criteria for being a former member isn't met, 2) because WP:NPOLITICIAN applies to members of a national, state or a provincial parliament. Gilgit-Baltistan Parliament, in question, is none of these because GB is not a province, rather a disputed territory that has some degree of autonomy.

I could just have taken it to AFD, but given that this article can only be promotional or filled with BLP issues, without imparting any value to wiki, CSD criteria G10, G11 and A7 apply. 103.255.6.80 (talk) 18:07, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Csd was declined. Kindly start afd with above comment for me.103.255.6.80 (talk) 18:24, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Since your not able to start an WP:AfD the normal way there is an alternate way you can start an AfD. -> Unregistered users who cannot complete the deletion nomination and should leave detailed reasons for deletion on Talk:Shah Salim Khan and then post a message at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion requesting that someone else complete the process.

Please do not use {{edit semi-protected}} template in your AfD request just create a new section titled "AfD Nomination" then explain and sign your reason. Then go to Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion requesting that someone else complete the process. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 19:04, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

AfD Nomination

I have nominated this article for deletion since it started as a mostly unsourced promo attempt later turning into somewhat negative article about a living person. I do not think that the subject is notable as yet. There's no indept coverage, and WP:GNG is not satisfied. Bare mentions in news do not make a personality notable.

Further, WP:NPOLITICIAN isn't satisfied two fold 1) because he is not a former member of the GB assembly rather a disqualified member. A former member is a person who has held the office in a previous term and the term has expired. This is the case of a disqualified member. So the criteria for being a former member isn't met, 2) because WP:NPOLITICIAN applies to members of a national, state or a provincial parliament. Gilgit-Baltistan Parliament, in question, is none of these because GB is not a province, rather a disputed territory that has some degree of autonomy.

Given that this article can only be promotional or filled with BLP issues, without imparting any value to wiki, CSD criteria G10, G11 and A7 apply. However, the CSD was declined probably because of disruption going on before hand. So I will like this to go through the AFD process and let the wikipedia policy prevail. 103.255.7.34 (talk) 09:41, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Please post the AFD on my behalf and use above comment as nomination as explained by the editor above because it requires an autoconfirmed registered user to do so. 103.255.7.34 (talk) 09:42, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done Hhkohh (talk) 09:59, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Blocked sock Dom from Paris (talk) 15:46, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Issues around personal details of a living person Hi, @Domdeparis: I believe you may have included too much information regarding Shah Salim Khan's personal finances and your edits are in violation of WP:BLP. The rules of Biographies for living people clearly state; "Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. This policy applies to any living person mentioned in a BLP, whether or not that person is the subject of the article, and to material about living persons in other articles and on other pages, including talk pages.[b] The burden of evidence rests with the editor who adds or restores material." Please kindly remove any details to Mr Khan's personal finances. RegardsJuan Diego Sanchez from Bogotta (talk) 08:51, 26 October 2018 (UTC) Hi @Juan Diego Sanchez from Bogotta: Would you mind explaining what personal finances you are referring to? Also would you mind saying if you have any relationship with this person that might constitute a conflict of interest. If you are talking about the fact that he was disqualified for defaulting on a loan I am afraid that this is public knowledge has been widely reported and the reason for which he is no longer a member of parliament so there is no privacy problem here. There is nothing else about his personal finances. Also this information was included in the sources added by the article creator. Dom from Paris (talk) 09:18, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

News of arrest

@domdeparis If I wanted to include information about Shah Salim Khan's arrest and long running property dispute with his mother. How would I do this? Would it require a new section or should I include it in the existing section on politics? There are sources on the event. https://pamirtimes.net/2018/06/08/ex-mla-shah-saleem-khan-arrested-on-mothers-complaint/ https://pamirtimes.net/2018/03/29/prince-shah-salim-khans-recent-arrest-and-history-of-hunza-palace-intrigues/ https://pamirtimes.net/2018/03/29/mir-ghazanfar-urged-to-withdraw-fir-against-sons-resolve-property-dispute-in-a-traditional-grand-hunza-marka/ https://profit.pakistantoday.com.pk/2018/03/25/gb-governor-has-sons-arrested-for-forging-property-papers/ https://www.dawn.com/news/1413111 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Purple flowers by default (talk • contribs) 13:57, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

I believe this may not be of due weight as per WP:DUEWEIGHT. Dom from Paris (talk) 17:12, 5 November 2018 (UTC)