Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khwajagan Naqvi

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 no consensus. j⚛e decker ^talk 21:12, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Khwajagan Naqvi[edit]

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

No references to verify. And "There was a very famous Pir called [...]"- this sounds like a NPOV. Now what should I do with this article? Jim Carter ^(talk) 10:55, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Jim Carter ^(talk) 10:57, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:57, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand. The example given, “There was a very famous Pir called Abdullah Ansari”, may be too-informal English for an encyclopedia, but it's not really a POV problem, as that historic individual's own article describes him as the “sage of Herat” and “One of the outstanding figures in Khorasan in the 5th/11th century: commentator of the Koran, traditionist, polemicist, and spiritual master, known for his oratory and poetic talents in Arabic and Persian.” (In other words, it seems he really was very famous.) The current article is about a particular branch of his descendents, so I think the real question is, what about them is noteworthy? I've added an {{expert-subject}} towards WP:WikiProject Islam. Unician ∇ 04:34, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Unician ∇ 09:59, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This could almost have been speedily deleted. The only source provided is from some chat forum, and it isn't even a citation; it's just pasted at the bottom of the article. Technically, the subject of this article may not have even been a real person. If they had been, then they don't seem to have left any lasting historical effect on the topic of religion in South Asia. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:38, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That lone external link wasn't provided by the article's creator, Alireike; I added that recently as the only match found by a Web search. I don't believe the subject of this article is supposed to refer to a person, it's about a group of people, a family tree of descendents from multiple persons who are legitimately noteworthy. The article mentions ancestors Abdullah Ansari and 'Ali Naqi by name, and by extension the Naqvis would be Syeds, descendents of Muhammad. That's why I thought this article has the potential to be notable, although obviously it needs a lot more source material. The 2005 web-forum discussion ended with a claim that this family tree is well-documented; if that forum writer is the same person as the creator of this Wikipedia article, now would be the time to bring out that documentation. Unician ∇ 10:52, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Unician, thank you for responding though I am still not convinced of this topic's notability. If it is a family then the notability of the members, as far as I understand, doesn't pass on to make this article itself notable per WP:NRV. The web forum is irrelevant as well, because anybody can say anything. I can make up some dude named Joey Joe Joe Jr. Shabanu and claim on those world history forums (you know what I'm talking about, I forgot the exact name) that he was a famous comedian in the 1960s. That doesn't make it true or even worth investigating, though. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:27, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I fully agree, there is nothing in the article today to establish notability. I was hoping that the article creator would participate in this discussion, and that perhaps some info from those treasured family records could be contributed to the article. Without it, this stub is a statement about (possibly) the author's family, meaningful to family members, but non-notable for an encyclopedia. (For example, we don't have even the name of one member of that family after the founding generations of the branch.) The existing articles Naqvis and Syed will have to suffice, and I expect this stub to be deleted. (I had expressed the preference to keep and expand, but if we can't expand it, we can't keep it.) Unician ∇ 04:19, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment "Famous" isn't a POV issue, it's a WP:PEACOCK term that needs rewording per WP:SOFIXIT. ~~I only have tablet access today so I can't check notability.~~ Google search returns a number of results but I don't know enough about Islamic naming conventions to comment on their veracity. Definately needs expert input. Philg88 ^♦talk 08:05, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 15:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:40, 16 June 2014 (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.