In all fairness, [[Chaudhry Zahoor Elahi]] in its original state was completely unsalvageable.

though, there was a clear assertion of notability; at the very least, the onus is on the tagger and/or admin to do some basic Googling to see if there's a prima facie indication that this isn't patent nonsense. These aren't the best examples to illustrate problems with the current deletion system, though. Every now and then when I check up on [[C:CSD]], I see articles like [[Maki Pulido]] tagged for speedying despite clear *examples* of notability within the article itself. This is systemic bias at its best; Pulido's article is especially interesting because after I removed the speedy tag, the tagger tagged it for PROD under the dubious reason that it had no sources (honestly, why is this a deletion criterion?) - something easily refutable by the fact that the article linked to the Philippine TV station's webpage on Pulido. Not related to speedy deletion in particular, I still remember the time that someone insisted that the upper and lower houses of Malaysia's Parliament were insufficiently notable to be separate articles, and proposed merging them into [[Parliament of Malaysia]]. It's very clear to me that we have a substantial systemic bias when it comes to new content, although I'm reluctant to draw any wideranging and broad conclusions from this. Johnleemk _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l