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. While some issues were identified with the article's quality there is a consensus he was a member of a body that qualifies for inclusion under
WP:NPOL.
Barkeep49 (
talk) 19:14, 1 March 2023 (UTC)reply
I think he was more of a bureaucrat than a politician, as it was one unelected post he was appointed to. The rest is all party membership fluff, but nothing indicating elected positions. Not even a candidate. I may be reading
NPOL inaccurately when it comes to Malaysian politics, tho. I also suspect the company may be more notable than he is. It should also be noted that there has been a lot of effort put into keeping this article alive, mainly by SPAs. This is the second time around for it. I think salting is a good idea.
GenQuest"scribble" 17:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't see why being appointed would make a difference as to his eligibility under NPOL. NPOL also includes judges, for example, who are usually not elected.
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 21:33, 23 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep: The article does seem very promotional, but he was a member of the Malaysian Senate according to
this , so the article should be kept per
WP:NPOL and
WP:POLOUTCOMES.
Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 03:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep as per
WP:NPOL - a member of the national senate. The article does need an improvement in tone, which is not, in itself, reason for deletion.
Rkieferbaum (
talk) 18:20, 1 March 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.