Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naser Kelmendi

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 no consensus. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:43, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Naser Kelmendi

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

BLP that does not pass WP:CRIME. Mccapra (talk) 08:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo. Mccapra (talk) 08:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP As far as I'm concerned this easily passes notability: he is inserted into the history of Sarajevo for reasons mentioned in the article, was singled out by US President Barack Obama for sanctions, is constantly in the news regarding events in the former Yugoslavia (including news from last year), and was even named as one of the most notorious criminals in 2012's OCCRP Person of the Year report. I agree the article needs to be expanded still, but nominating for deletion this early and by pointing to a guideline that the article does not seem to breach as far as notability goes seems a bit premature to me. --Dynamo128 (talk) 08:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP/INCUBATE this article was created in the last 24 hours. It has sufficient sourcing in my mind to satisfy WP:CRIME and WP:GNG, and in my own search I see coverage I’d describe as in depth and ongoing coverage, he’s been tried and convicted and that was covered in major world media (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-kosovo-trial-kelmendi-idUSKBN1FL5SA), he’s under sanctions (https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/126/20150324_kelmendi.pdf), etc. Why are we rushing to delete this article? Give the authors some time to improve the article. My own quick search suggests he’s notable, I encourage others to conduct their own cursory search before reaching any conclusions. Jo7hs2 (talk) 16:17, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 13:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 11:25, 10 April 2023 (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.