Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pratikur Rahaman

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. I see a consensus here to Delete this article. This is not "vote counting", I've read this entire discussion and the majority of participating editors are not persuaded that sources provide significant coverage to establish that GNG is met.

This decision doesn't mean that an article about this subject wil never exist but if a new version is attempted, should this subject become more notable, it should receive an AFC review first. Recreating this article in main space makes a CSD G4 speedy deletion very likely and should this happen more than once, it is probable that the article page title will be protected and the likelihood of a future article becomes more dim. Liz Read! Talk! 22:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pratikur Rahaman

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

Pratikur Rahaman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. This is also written promotionally. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
https://indianexpress.com/article/political-pulse/cpm-next-gen-who-is-pratikur-rahaman-9256427/ Yes Yes WP:RSPS Yes The source discusses the subject directly and in detail. ✔ Yes
https://hindi.news24online.com/india/pratikur-rahaman-who-cpim-candidate-contest-election-against-abhishek-banerjee-in-diamond-harbour-seat/660274/ Yes Yes The source is a major news channel. Yes The source discusses the subject directly and in detail. ✔ Yes
https://eisamay.com/west-bengal-news/24pargana-news/diamond-harbour-left-candidate-pratikur-rahaman-know-details-about-her/amp_articleshow/109069775.cms Yes Yes The source is a major Bengali newspaper. Yes The source discusses the subject directly and in detail. ✔ Yes
https://www.moneycontrol.com/elections/lok-sabha-election/lok-sabha-elections-2024-who-is-pratikur-rahaman-the-cpm-candidate-taking-on-abhishek-from-diamond-harbour-article-12594511.html Yes The source is a well known financial news website run by Network18, which has partnerships with CNN. Yes The source discusses the subject directly and in detail. ? Unknown
https://indianexpress.com/elections/diamond-harbour-lok-sabha-constituency-two-time-sitting-mp-abhishek-banerjee-to-face-challenge-from-cpims-pratikur-rahaman-and-bjps-abhijit-das-9317741/ Yes Yes WP:RSPS ~ The article has a paragraph on the subject. ~ Partial
https://www.indiatoday.in/india-today-insight/story/how-young-leaders-are-spawning-a-generational-shift-in-cpi-m-1927728-2022-03-21 Yes Yes The source is the highly regarded magazine India Today. ~ The article has a paragraph on the subject ~ Partial
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
Not just WP:GNG but there is also WP:NBIO for biographical articles. The guideline mentions these conditions too.
"If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability"
To this end the last 2 sources meet the requirement too. Therefore with these conditions and with the availability of these sources, mere handwave arguments with guideline links asserting the subject is not notable should not be made. MrMkG (talk) 18:32, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With your source analysis above, it becomes obvious that you do not clearly know how GNG works or what a reliable independent significant coverage is. Don’t worry, that’s the essence of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is in essence another handwave comment and now in a patronising tone. Are you trying to say that major newspapers, news channels, etc are not reliable independent sources? Are you even familiar with Indian sources? Or are you trying to say that the coverage is not significant, that there is something inaccurate in my description? MrMkG (talk) 21:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The subject does not meet WP:GNG. These sources before 2024 election only provide passing mentions with a bunch of new sources because of the candidacy, wrote about him in some or single paragraph about him. Additionally, these sources merely announce his candidacy against TMC leader Abhishek. I've already voted against many articles created due to the 2024 General Elections Which fails WP:BLP1E; these candidates are not elected as MPs yet and do not meet WP:NPOL. Being a vice-president of a student organization does not meet NPOL criteria either. Furthermore, this coverage cannot justify notability. We can wait to see if he wins and becomes an MP or, in future elections, an MLA; then he will automatically become notable. GrabUp - Talk 10:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC) edited 20:50, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! Now I understand what the problem is. There is a blind knee-jerk reaction to delete any article on the 2024 election candidates with whatever reason one can word out, if they don't pass WP:NPOL even if they pass WP:NBIO and WP:GNG because there is a rush of new article creations with many presumably having little substance. I must also point out that one of the sources is from 2022 and has nothing to do with the candidacy.
The claim you make that the sources are making "passing mentions with a single paragraph" is grossly false, no other way to put it (a paragraph is also not just a "passing mention" but let's set that aside for a moment because it's more than one paragraph). Let us just randomly pick out one source from them and quote the entire part on the subject.
"Pratik Ur was the state president of SFI. He came to the center of discussion during the Panchayat elections. Left leaders alleged that opposition candidates and agents were not allowed to enter Fakir Chand College. After that Prateek Ur Rahman protested by sitting on the local streets. Prateek Ur was arrested at that time.
Prateek Ur's wife Shireen Sultana contested from Zilla Parishad seat number 59 of South 24 Parganas in the panchayat elections. He also became the Left-Congress-Indian Secular Front candidate for the Diamond Harbor Assembly constituency in Ekush assembly elections. Prateek Ur handled the responsibility of SFI for long 6 years. This year Srijan-Pratik Ur duo was released. This time a bigger responsibility is on his shoulders.
After announcing his name as a candidate, Prateek Ur Rahman said, 'I think the people of Diamond Harbor are average. Average against corruptionists. Means in favor of a healthy culture.' Also, Prateek Ur said that he does not believe in 'adversarial politics'. He said, 'I think the common people will unite against those who talk about dividing people on the basis of religion without talking about bread and sustenance.' Along with this, he has fired cannon at Trinamool. Prateek Ur said, 'We will talk about bread and rice, we will talk about the mill factory.'"
Under no logical way understanding of the term can this be called a passing mention. Most of the sources in the table are about him as the subject. I must remind those people droning about the obvious WP:NPOL failure, that at the end of WP:NPOL, it is said "An unelected candidate can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline." MrMkG (talk) 12:06, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously a lot of articles are going to be created especially in this election and many of them may not be notable. But that doesn't mean any and every candidate is non-notable.
Many wikipedia-notable people don't have articles and when they are made candidate, those articles get created due to the attention. I have created dozens of articles of current and former MLAs and even MPs.
They met WP:NPOL for years even decades but their articles were created now. Same applies to WP:GNG and WP:NBIO passing people. This bias is very disconcerting. MrMkG (talk) 12:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Eisamay doesn't seem reliable to me; it's owned by The Times of India's BCCL, which itself can't establish notability for its promotional content as per WP:TOI. I never considered this a reliable source. When I mentioned sources only provide passing mentions, I was only referring reliable sources, not these unreliable sources. GrabUp - Talk 12:27, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you were correct, you could have chosen other sources like The Indian Express or India Today, which you mentioned in your analysis as providing in-depth coverage of the subject. However, you chose this unreliable source just to counter my argument, you can’t choose these reliable sources as these only provided passing mentions. GrabUp - Talk 12:34, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ei Samay isn't Times of India, completely different paper. The list you linked to has outlets from the same company with completely different ratings. Just because it's owned by the same company doesn't mean they're all the same. BCCL probably has close to a hundred outlets. I have never seen Ei Samay being accused of promotion.
But ok, you don't like Ei Samay, then there is Indian Express. (WP:INDIANEXP) You can randomly pick from them. These articles are literally about him. It is titled "CPM next-gen: Who is Pratikur Rahaman, tasked with taking on Abhishek Banerjee?".
Pratikur Rahaman, the CPI(M)’s pick, is a local. At present, the 33-year-old is a member of the CPI(M) state committee and is the national vice-president of the Students’ Federation of India (SFI), the party’s student wing. Rahaman, who studied at the Fakir Chand College in Diamond Harbour, lives on the outskirts of Diamond Harbour with his parents, brothers, wife and daughter. His family, according to party insiders, runs a construction material supply business.
“I am not fighting against any individual. My fight is against the policies of the TMC and BJP,” Rahaman told The Indian Express after his candidature was announced.
This will not be Rahaman’s first time in the poll fray. In 2021, he contested from Diamond Harbour, finishing third after Pannalal Halder of the TMC and Deepak Halder of the BJP.
“I got associated with the SFI in 2011 following which I have been assaulted by TMC goons many times. They cannot stop me with violence. I will fight back hard,” Rahaman said
Terming the TMC’s “Diamond Harbour model” as a bluff, Rahaman accused the TMC and BJP of being anti-farmer. “The prices of fertilisers are increasing while the farmers are getting poorer. We are against this policy,” the CPI(M) candidate said.
It's all similar level of coverage. You will also find more if you search and some of them will be much before the candidacy too. There is no real reason to delete the article. MrMkG (talk) 13:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That’s what I said. The reliable sources just gave passing mentions, and one paragraph of coverage is not enough to establish notability. His words mean nothing. I don’t know why you are sharing his quotes. GrabUp - Talk 13:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not one paragraph even if you ignore the quotes and again in no logical understanding can this be called "passing mention". Even if we accept this extraordinary standard, can you explain what "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability" means? It is part of WP:NBIO. MrMkG (talk) 13:32, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned that other reliable sources provided passing mentions, but this particular source (Indian Express) lacks depth covarage—it's just one paragraph. The main subject of these articles is the election, not this person. These sources can't establish notability because they don't provide in-depth coverage of the subject. GrabUp - Talk 13:41, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main subject is him as a candidate in the election. And are you unable to count? It's 5 paragraphs and ignoring the ones with quotes, it is 2 paragraphs. MrMkG (talk) 14:42, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MrMkG, The consensus is nearly reached, as I can see from the comments of other editors. Your counting won't help to keep this article. Its just you the author of the article who want’s to keep the article. GrabUp - Talk 14:47, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know WP:CONSENSUS is determined by quality of arguments and their basis in policy not votes. But yeah I understand it might still get deleted because in actuality many admins dont follow this and only really look at votes.

Sure I am the author but your argument has no leg to stand on which you yourself can clearly understand it seems, which begs the question why do you want to delete it so badly for no apparent reason?

Btw back to the actual point. Were you saying the two which I quoted aren't passing mention but the rest which I haven't quoted yet are? Lol. Do I really have to do this? It's all similar level of coverage.

Title: Who Is 33 Year Old Pratikur Rahman? Will Contest Elections Against Abhishek Banerjee ~ About him as a candidate.

Pratikur Rahman, 33, is currently a member of the CPI(M) State Committee. He is also the national vice president of the party's student wing, Students Federation of India (SFI). He studied at Fakir Chand College, Diamond Harbour. He lives on the outskirts of Diamond Harbor with his parents, brothers, wife and daughter. His family is involved in the business of construction material supply.
Pratikur Rahman is not contesting elections for the first time, but he had also contested the assembly elections from Diamond Harbor in 2021. TMC candidate Pannalal Haldar had won that election. Pratikur Rahman was at third place with 38,719 votes, while BJP candidate Deepak Kumar Halder was at second place.

Title: Who is Pratikur Rahaman, the CPM candidate taking on Abhishek from Diamond Harbour? ~ About him as a candidate.

Rahaman, 33, chosen by the CPI (M), is a local candidate. He serves as a member of the CPI (M) state committee and holds the position of national vice-president within the Students’ Federation of India (SFI), the party's student wing. Rahaman completed his education at Fakir Chand College in Diamond Harbour and currently resides on the outskirts of Diamond Harbour with his parents, brothers, wife, and daughter. Reports say, the Left leader's family is involved in a business specialising in the supply of construction materials.
Rahman is no stranger to electoral contests, having earlier contested the assembly elections from Diamond Harbour in 2021. During that election, TMC candidate Pannalal Haldar clinched victory. Rahman secured the third position with 38,719 votes, while the BJP candidate, Deepak Kumar Halder, secured the second position.
Rahaman clarified to The Indian Express that his candidacy is not aimed at any specific individual. Instead, it represents a stand against the policies advocated by both the TMC and BJP.

How young leaders are spawning a generational shift in CPI(M) ~ About a group of young leaders in his party, he is one of the subjects of the article (2022).

Of the new young faces in CPI(M) state committee, several have shown promise, such as Minakshi Mukherjee, Srijan Bhattacharya, Mayukh Biswas and Pratikur Rahaman—all in their twenties or early thirties. Pratikur Rahaman is a good orator and has been raising his voice for the youth, particularly the unemployed who are forced to depend on the TMC government’s doles. His house in South 24 Parganas was allegedly vandalised and his family tea-stall damaged in the post-assembly poll results violence in May 2021. 

Title: Two time sitting MP Abhishek Banerjee to face challenge from CPIM’s Pratikur Rahaman and BJP’s Abhijit Das ~ About all three candidates in the election, he is one of the three subjects of the article.

The most successful party from this seat, the Communist Party of India (Marxist), has fielded the young Pratikur Rahaman as their candidate for the Diamond Harbour Lok Sabha Constituency in a bid to regain their dominance over the seat they have dominance in historically. This will be Rahman’s first attempt in mainstream politics as he has earlier served as the national vice-president of the Students Federation of India and a member of the state committee of the CPI(M) in West Bengal.

Not one of them can be called "passing mention" by any logical understanding of the term. In 2 of them it is one paragraph long and the other 4 are articles on him and multiple paragraphs long.

Let us assume, taking as strict a standard as possible that none of them individually help meet significant or substanital coverage part of WP:GNG. But it is impossible to escape the part of WP:NBIO that says "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability".

So what is your justification? MrMkG (talk) 15:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said these are just routine public announcments for election, these don’t establish notability. To establish notability it require more in-depth covarage of the subject. Also, BLP require strong sources. GrabUp - Talk 15:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a new thing you're saying. What is routine public announcement about them? Public announcement is what parties make, this is coverage of a person by independent newspapers, magazines and channels. Look at any other politician or political articles, the same kind of news sources are there.
Also again "if the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability" according to WP:NBIO (section ~ WP:BASIC) which you're ignoring since you can't give an answer to it. MrMkG (talk) 15:31, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Already told you, these sources are just some paragraphs and are only about one event, the election candidacy. They all report the same information such as his name, age, candidacy, and about his wife; nothing more to establish this person as notable. Even you combine them, they just talk the same thing, what is the point to combine? GrabUp - Talk 15:51, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should have read what other editor said before, read this WP:BLP1E which says :
We generally should avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met:
  1. Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.
GrabUp - Talk 16:05, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Allow me to interject. I seldom make arbitrary nominations for deletion on AfD. Prior to proposing an article for deletion, I ensure that I have conducted extensive research on the subject of the article. I am confident in my understanding of our policies and would not nominate an article for deletion if the subject, under any circumstances, meets any of our notability criteria. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:08, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces, Thank you for the comment. I acknowledge your good-faith nomination and research. However, this editor doesn't understand WP:BLP1E. These sources are solely because of the candidacy, nothing more. GrabUp - Talk 16:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grabup You are right, that was part of the reason I nominated it, after my evaluation. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grabup and @Vanderwaalforces. How would you combine them? Many of them are similar but each has some unique detail or the other (for example, his family business is mentioned in just one source).
I have seen other AfDs and in any other case, these articles would have easily been called "significant coverage" for WP:GNG, afterall you can't exactly get more coverage from an article than the article being about the subject itself. And what does "just some paragraphs" even mean? Articles are created with paragraphs. What do you want? A book? You will even find some CMs who don't have chapters in books.
This is effectively just based on a feeling that the article shouldn't exist, jumping from one justification to another and seeing whatever sticks on the wall while applying an unusual and unreasonably strict standard which most notable articles wouldn't meet. From vaguely mentioning policies to claiming the sources are "passing mention" when that's obviously false to claiming sources aren't reliable and now ultimately coming up with WP:BLP1E. There is no "research" behind it, it's an after the fact attempt at justification.
BLP1E gets the closest to reasonable (and I can only thank you for that finally) and that wasn't mentioned at all before except by a different user, ignored by everyone else. But even that's not really applicable. Admittedly his coverage is heavy around the candidacy but not solely about it. Out of the six articles, one of them is from 2022 about new leaders including him in the party and has nothing to do with the candidacy. Had there in fact been research one would have found more. There is an article from 2023 about a protest led by him and his arrest. There is a page linked to WP:BLP1E called WP:BLP1ENOT, it talks about exactly this situation.
"An exceptionally common misinterpretation of BLP1E is that subjects notable primarily for one event are notable only for one event. If the article's subject has done more than one notable thing, even if the rest of it is far overshadowed by the primary event, BLP1E does not apply."
Even if we take the surge of election coverage as one, we can combine them with these and we have again met WP:NBIO's WP:BASIC criteria. Individuals don't easily have full articles written on them (most candidates don't) and the NBIO criteria is laxer than GNG seemingly by design because of this.
Also @Jeraxmoira who had actually mentioned BLP1E. MrMkG (talk) 18:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MrMkG, I have been mentioning to you from the beginning that 'These were created due to the 2024 General Elections,' which I was referring to as WP:BLP1E. Your analysis is can't exempt this article from WP:BLP1E, as you mentioned WP:BLP1ENOT mentioned "An exceptionally common misinterpretation of BLP1E is that subjects notable primarily for one event are notable only for one event. If the article's subject has done more than one notable thing, even if the rest of it is far overshadowed by the primary event, BLP1E does not apply."
  1. Joining a political party is not a notable thing. This can't exempt this article from BLP1E.
  2. Peoplesreporter.in is not an reliable source. As there is no editorial details found on their About US or any other pages.
GrabUp - Talk 18:35, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. It's not about joining a party. It's about leaders in a party and it is talking about a generational shift highlighting people in the new leadership which includes him. In it there's a mention of him joining the state committee of the party.
2. We are back to claiming sources are unreliable when nothing else works now. đŸ€Š What you see there is what any website of a Bengali (or even Indian) news outlet looks like. Anandabazar Patrika/About Us looks the exact same, I hope you consider that reliable because if it isn't then no Bengali news outlet is. Indian news outlets very rarely if at all have anything like "editorial details" on their websites. MrMkG (talk) 18:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Btw you just changed the meaning of your first comment in this edit. Had you meant BLP1E, you would have mentioned it far earlier than you did and not made the arguments you made. But whatever it doesn't matter but mentioning it since you change makes my later comment not make sense. Don't edit comments after they are replied to. MrMkG (talk) 19:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can't compare a mainstream Bengali media outlet with an unknown website. There are thousands of Bengali news websites on the web. Can we start to accept them as reliable? Also, there was a discussion that took place at the RS Noticeboard about its reliability, and a consensus was reached that the source, Anandabazar, is reliable. I don't think there has been any discussion about this source before considering it reliable. GrabUp - Talk 19:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The point was that standard you just set for the website that isn't even met by Anandabazar.
Not being discussed before doesn't mean it is presumed unreliable. It's not an unknown website. It's a new but well regarded news website. Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, who is the highest acclaimed Bengali journalist active at present publishes in there. The WP:RSPS list has similar ones like Newslaundry and The Wire, so there is no reason such a website shouldn't be considered reliable. MrMkG (talk) 19:50, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Active at present? According to the link provided, he never published anything on the website, only a video on YouTube published back in 2023. I edited my initial post to clarify that I was referring to WP:BLP1E, which you reverted, no problem. Even I assume that the source is reliable, it lacks in-depth coverage. The article itself is quite short and contains quotations from the subject. This source cannot elevate this event to notable status, which would exempt it from WP:BLP1E. GrabUp - Talk 20:05, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There maybe others like him historically, just being on the safe side. Publishing a video on their channel is still publishing.

Anyways, the source is sufficient to be contributing coverage for WP:BASIC, it's a short article but he is the central figure in it.

WP:BLP1E itself says that "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event". It isn't only in the context of a single event, there are at least two other articles which cover him in different contexts.

WP:BLP1ENOT mentions it too and on a complete reading of the page, "more than one notable thing" just looks like poor wording to mean anything more than that one notable thing rather than two or more notable things. The purpose of BLP1E is described as "more a courtesy we grant potentially unwilling article subjects than anything", says the criteria is very narrow and describes situations where even related minlr events can make BLP1E not applicable.

Both the pages say that two other criteria must be met besides being only covered in one event. One of them is that the person has to a "low-profile individual" (WP:LOWPROFILE) which practically no politician or political activist would really be. The subject here is involved in active public life, in protests and is an MP candidate.

Nevertheless, the interpretation you're giving would contradict WP:BASIC too which allows articles on the basis of multiple events with just less coverage. It can't be that one person who gets only multiple low coverage events can have an article and one person who gets one high coverage event and other low coverage ones can't have an article. MrMkG (talk) 22:51, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the amazing discussion, but I am not convinced that this source is reliable. I told you that there are thousands of Bengali news websites like this. Can we start to accept them as reliable? I don’t think this discussion is going to end. Let's let others and the admins decide what they think is right. Have a nice day. GrabUp - Talk 02:53, 17 May 2024 (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.
Quelle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pratikur_Rahaman