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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:39, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Khurshid Anwar Jilani[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Questionably notable and improvable, at least English-wise, as my searches found nothing better at all even India-based searches, and none of this suggests better satisfying WP:CREATIVE. SwisterTwister talk 22:12, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 22:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 22:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 22:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 22:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 22:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Tried and failed to find subtantive coverage of any kind. Perhaps there are sources in Urdu; I highly doubt there are substantive things in English that I've missed. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:24, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Searches did not turn up any in-depth coverage to show it passes WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:35, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: On its way to deletion, but giving some time to provide reliable sources--Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete without prejudice, should evidence of non-trivial coverage come forward at a later date. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 01:08, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:21, 25 January 2016 (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.