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 Keep - unanimous decision after references were provided. Non admin closure --L-- 12:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sajeeb Wazed (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

His mother and grandfather seem to be his only claim to notability. On his own, he fails WP:BIO. Jauerback 18:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Agree. He has shown up talking about things, but there's no reason to believe he's actually done anything that would give notability. In addition, sources are very weak, except for BBC which is really just a passing mention. Recurring dreams managed to find some good diffs. Does seem notable now, so keep. I suppose this makes this a unanimous keep vote now then, would anyone be objected to closing it? --L-- 18:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. Notability is not inherited. The article is also spammy (external link - the guy's blog). Both interwiki links are bogus. Very possibly a vanity/COI case here. --Targeman 19:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep — the article has references from two different news organisations, with headlines and stories directly focussing on him. These are not trivial mentions, and the organisations seem like reliable, independent sources. If I'm correct on both counts, the guy is definitely notable — completely aside from questions of his ancestry and of his blog. Nyttend 19:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep per Nyttend. Most reliable sources are in another language, and the fact that he was part of Bangladesh's political maneuvers as an active participant surely provides notability. Recurring dreams 22:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I still have my doubts about his notability. He gave a couple of interviews as a famous person's son. He went to Harvard. Until now, no big deal. In my book, his only substantial claim to fame could be his 2007 global young leader award; however, if you look here, you'll notice this award is given to scores of people every year, and the overwhelming majority of them don't have Wikipedia entries. And the award has only been around for 3 years. --Targeman 22:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the early biographical detail that makes him notable (I don't disagree with your arguments regarding that). It's his involvement in Bangladeshi politics. Here's just some coverage from the Daily Star, the country's largest selling English language newspaper: [1], [2], [3], [4]. I'd be able to find ten times as many references if my Bengali was good enough. Recurring dreams 23:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. I didn't take into account the obvious fact that there could be several different transcriptions of his name (Sajeeb/Sajib, Wazed/Wajed). Your sources are convincing and should be incorporated in the article, together with the alternative transcriptions. I hereby change my vote to keep. --Targeman 23:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as per sources found by Recurring dreams which demonstrate notability. Davewild 07:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep highly notable figure, obviously groomed by AL as future prime minister of the country. Do note that there are also articles like Chelsea Clinton. --Soman 08:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable figure, article needs expansion however. Ozgod 03:58, 4 August 2007 (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.