Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Ghulam Moinuddin Gilani

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Ghulam Moinuddin Gilani

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Subject does not appear to meet relevant notability guidelines and lacks non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources. Steps were taken to locate sources WP:BEFORE this nomination, but were not successful. Saqib (talk) 21:27, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:47, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Administrators of important shrines on the Indian Subcontinent tend to be fairly well known and influential officials and the article indeed contains claims of significance, e.g., as regards condolences. Whether it crosses the WP:NBIO bar needs to be established, but that was my reasoning when I decided not to nominate this one for deletion when I AfD'd (or speedied) other articles created by the same editor back in May. — kashmīrī ^TALK 07:40, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Popularity or importance does not equate with notability here on English WP. Administrators of important shrines are not given an automatic free pass over WP:BIO just because they exist so we should avoid saying there must be sources out there somewhere, we need to actually the establish the WP:N by providing the coverage in RS. --Saqib (talk) 08:07, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib: Really??? — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes really! --Saqib (talk) 09:18, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

</sarcasm> — kashmīrī ^TALK 10:06, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this article should be nominated for deletion. The matter of fact is that the isn't any issue about the notability factor. This person is very famous around the sub-continent.

User Saqib has just nominated my pages for deletion just because I added details he thought weren't 'valid enough on another pages he was watching — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zaydbinumar (talk • contribs) 23:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails notability on the basis of the sources. Dom from Paris (talk) 05:10, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Redditaddict6 9 17:35, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Insufficient coverage in secondary sources. I'm not sure if a redirect to Shrine of Meher Ali Shah would be reasonable. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:33, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closing admin At-least two other articles of similar nature created by the same user were deleted recently. Syed Shah Abdul Haq Gilani and Syed Shah Abdul Haq Gillani. --Saqib (talk) 06:49, 1 September 2018 (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.