Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayyid Ibrahimul Khaleelul Bukhari
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 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 speedy delete. G11, hopelessly promotional--and I'm also G11'ing the article on his institution, Ma'din DGG ( talk ) 05:23, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Sayyid Ibrahimul Khaleelul Bukhari (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
There is hardly any evidence of notability provided for this person. This article does not provide enough good quality references. Most of the edits are done by only one contributor who seems to have a WP:CoI regarding the subject matter.Delete per lack of any WP:RS to support notability Harishrawat11 (talk) 05:44, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 November 3. Snotbot t • c » 06:03, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- wait he could potentially be notable, lets ask for some sources. If he is the founder of a notable institution for WP he could be too. Though ill admit the one news source is not lending credibility and im doubting if all the content is trueLihaas (talk) 06:11, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:00, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:00, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jenks24 (talk) 09:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not notable, unreferenced person at a not notable unreferenced academy. Then lots of fluff about the academy. I'm sure he is a nice person, though. --Modern.Jewelry.Historian (talk) 21:59, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:18, 17 November 2012 (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.