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. slakr^\ talk / 03:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hym[edit]

Hym (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)

A biography article that fails not only the basic criteria for the notability of biography articles but also the specific criteria for Musicians. SMS ^Talk 12:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. SMS ^Talk 12:59, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. SMS ^Talk 13:01, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hamza Yaqoob Malik or HYM is an artist who has just launched a cover song as a debut. Once he starts doing more work there will be more details available. I would like to request to please cancel its deletion nomination as it will be updated on regular basis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarihaPervezFan (talk • contribs) 13:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep:Looks like a very nicely written article to me with proper sources in it to establish notability, should be kept. Why delete it?Sajjad Altaf (talk) 19:26, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Sajjad Altaf As I explained in the nomination it fails the basic notability criteria for a biography that requires "multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject" for a subject to be considered notable. Now all the three sources in the article are primary and unreliable, thus failing each and every bit of this criteria. -- SMS ^Talk 19:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I think we should still give it some time and give it a second thought. Moreover I see a couple of different sources there.Sajjad Altaf (talk) 20:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You can comment multiple times, but do not format your later comments as if they are separate !votes. postdlf (talk) 19:09, 4 March 2014 (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.