- Abdul Samad Dawood (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Little has changed in his fortunes since the last AFD eight months ago. He's still a successful and civic-minded businessman from a prominent Pakistani business family, and has worked at a high level for some notable companies. But on Wikipedia, notability is not inherited. I couldn't find SIGCOV of him in English or Urdu, just passing mentions in articles about the companies and organisations he's worked for, nothing to bring it up to the standard of WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Wikishovel (talk) 17:16, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Pakistan. Wikishovel (talk) 17:16, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: If only he had appeared in a few dramas, even in tiny roles, his BLP might have been easily saved from deletion under WP:NACTOR! But it’s ironic that someone so important in Pakistan's business community doesn’t have enough coverage that meets GNG. Anyway, I’ll hold off on voting for now. PS. No offense to the nominator Wikishovel, who also has legitimate reasons for taking it to AFD. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Still not a slam dunk; outside of the Engro connection, there are no RS that discuss him and we only have source 13 that is helpful. Rest are yellow per Source Highlighter, so of moderate reliability. I still don't see/find much else we can use. Oaktree b (talk) 22:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: The article follows the guidelines of WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV as it demonstrates significant coverage in both Pakistani and international media, meeting WP:RS. As per WP:BASIC, “People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published[4] secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,[5] and independent of the subject.[6]” Please feel free to check the sources, they meet all the mentioned criteria. Crosji (talk) 07:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Reuters is RS.--Ameen Akbar (talk) 14:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete non-notable obscure business executive. Already deleted under Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samad Dawood. I suggest to WP:SALT the topic because Dawood family won't stop paying these UPEs. 188.31.32.162 (talk) 20:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: This statement clearly violates WP:AFDEQ by making personal remarks about the subject. Given this user's anonymity, it could potentially be part of a coordinated attack, possibly even Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry.
- Crosji (talk) 08:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Non-notable at this time. The sources that are not not primary/self-published, Reuters, Financial Post, The News, can be considered trivial mentions at most, but not significant coverage about Dawood. These sources are a better proof of notability for the corporation, Engro, not for Dawood himself. Prof.PMarini (talk) 08:31, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep this is WP:V and there exist WP:NEXIST 202.141.250.250 (talk) 11:47, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 19:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]