From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Daniel ( talk) 00:54, 23 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Rayhan Asat

Rayhan Asat (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. The person is not high enough up in the Atlantic Council to be notable, and there doesn't appear to be any in-depth coverage of her. Bbb23 ( talk) 01:05, 16 July 2021 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: In depth coverage? Do you refer to her not being mentioned enough in the press? If so, see New York Times, the Guardian and CNN for a few examples. In addition a large range of well known media outlets publish her opinion pieces because she is intrinsically involved in Uyghur human rights activism in the United States. She is one of the most prominent Uyghur activists, has regular correspondence with US senators and only a few weeks ago discussed the Uyghur Genocide and her brother with the US Secretary of State. DolphinSassoon ( talk) 01:19, 16 July 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:19, 16 July 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:19, 16 July 2021 (UTC) reply
  • keep (maybe move) due to in-depth coverage but potentially move to the topic at hand, such as Internment of Ekpar Asat. Otherwise it would be WP:BLP1E since the coverage is not about her but about her cause and her brother. -- hroest 18:47, 16 July 2021 (UTC) reply
Comment WP:BLP1E applies only "If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual", and the sources below demonstrate that she has not otherwise remained and does not appear likely to remain a low-profile individual. She appears to be covered by multiple independent and reliable sources over time due to her multi-faceted advocacy and its various impacts, with biographical and career information that can further develop a BLP article. Beccaynr ( talk) 19:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC) reply
Thanks for your comment, I changed my vote and removed the suggestion to move. -- hroest 14:13, 17 July 2021 (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.