Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdulkhabeer Muhammad: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 05:48, 3 February 2022

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. NW (Talk) 00:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Abdulkhabeer Muhammad

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability not established. Specifically does not appar to have been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. Wkharrisjr (talk) 01:54, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I could not verify a key point : he is not on the list of either regular [1] or adjunct[2] or visiting [3] faculty at Nova Southeastern Law School. ` DGG ( talk ) 02:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Zero hits in Google Scholar. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:32, 13 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Delete I'll paste my prod rationale: nothing in the article makes a strong case for notability. professor at a not-so-great university, nothing published in google scholar. basically nothing in google news. can't find any good sources in normal google. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:31, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.DrPhosphorus (talk) 09:57, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless some really good refs appear suddenly. Doesn't seem to be anything much of note anyway. Peridon (talk) 23:13, 15 January 2011 (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.

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 *'''Delete''' per nom.[[User:DrPhosphorus|DrPhosphorus]] ([[User talk:DrPhosphorus|talk]]) 09:57, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' unless some really good refs appear suddenly. Doesn't seem to be anything much of note anyway. [[User:Peridon|Peridon]] ([[User talk:Peridon|talk]]) 23:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
-:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>