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. Sandstein 08:25, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Waleed Tariq Saigol (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)

Unelected MP, and an interim cabinet minister. As discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people)#Caretaker_cabinet_members, I don't think interim cabinet minister are something that would be expected to have an article on English Wikipedia, unless pass GNG.

Subject also lacks non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources and therefore does not appear to meet basic GNG as well Saqib (talk) 12:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:01, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:01, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:01, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as unelected MPs are not considered notable, unless they have received coverage from reliable news sources. The subjects hasn't received that, and therefore is not notable. Regards, Knightrises10 talk 18:36, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. While strictly speaking the notability test for a politician is the holding of a notable office rather than the question of whether he was elected or appointed to it, I have to agree that "caretaker" ministers, generally civil servants who held the office solely by virtue of being the top person in the line of succession between the end of the previous holder's term and the appointment or election of the official new permanent holder, are not entitled to the same automatic presumption of notability that a regular cabinet minister would get. If he could be sourced well enough to clear WP:GNG, then things would be different — but the mere inclusion of his name in a list of all the caretaker ministers who took office at the same time is not enough sourcing to deem him notable all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 22:38, 8 October 2018 (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.