Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Shah Abdul Haq Gilani

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. Notability is not temporary, but GNG requires multiple sources, and it appears we have at most one. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:13, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Shah Abdul Haq 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) 21:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:45, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:46, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note This page was deleted last month under A7. other bios with dubious notablity (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Ghulam Mohiyyuddin Gilani & Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Ghulam Moinuddin Gilani) created by the same user. --Saqib (talk) 10:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This page may be eligible for speedy deletion per WP:G4, since a previous article about the same person using a slightly different spelling of his name was deleted by AfD a few months ago. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:41, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While there is consideration that various CSDs may apply, pending that, there isn't any additional support on the AfD grounds and so I think a relist is in order
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 10:02, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Of the three sources cited, two are clearly not WP:RS, [1][2] and the third appears to be a book published in 1998, [3] which thus cannot possibly be cited for anything more recent, even if it meets WP:RS. The biography is unabashed puffery, which fails to provide any verifiable evidence that this individual is notable by Wikipedia standards. He may quite possibly be "a composition of sincerity, love, sobriety and dignity", but as far as I'm aware, that doesn't exempt a biography on him from having to meet the same standards as any other article. 81.154.7.26 (talk) 02:41, 24 August 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.