Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed ali akhtar rizvi

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. postdlf (talk) 19:15, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Syed ali akhtar rizvi

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

I find no matches in GBooks or GNews and only circular matches or matches to other people with (apparently, if 2002 as year of death is correct) the same name in a general Google search. If the "60 books" mentioned were notable, then independent reliable sources should be available to support the claims made rather than being limited to dubious uploads on scribd or equally dubious Facebook links. PROD removed without explanation along with all past improvement notices, so raising for wider discussion. Fæ (talk) 16:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. In addition, it also appears, by the editing history and web results, this biography may be entirely factitious. Lord Arador (talk) 18:49, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ - problem here might be more to do with lack of English language sources not to mention the variety of ways his name can be transcribed into English. Anyway, slight adjustment of his name produces more favourable results on google books and google scholar. Plenty of notability also.
- Delete - As Fæ has clarified that Sa'id Akhtar Rizvi and Syed ali akhtar rizvi are distinct from each other and the google search links I found above relate to the former I don't feel notability has yet been established in this instance.FiachraByrne 20:36, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Strong Delete This article has no references and that violates WP:BLP Ryan Vesey (talk) 23:59, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article says the person died in 2002, so it can't possibly be a BLP violation, because that policy applies only to articles about people who are living. Cullen328 (talk) 00:29, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Google Books shows a number of books by Saeed Akhtar Rizvi translated into English in Tanzania. I assume this is the same person. Cullen328 (talk) 00:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- No, your assumption appears to be wrong. Sa'id Akhtar Rizvi was born in 1927, this article is about someone born in 1948; 21 years later. Fæ (talk) 07:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:V--Sodabottle (talk) 06:45, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As Fæ mentioned the links scribd and Facebook, I know that both of these sites sometimes copy text from Wikipedia (i.e. they are Mirror sites), which may be the reason why links like these are not reliable for most Wikipedia articles. Other than that, I agree that this article doesn't meet the verifiability policy. Minimac (talk) 08:23, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It is a reason why they're not reliable, but not the only reason. Even when those sites don't copy the text from Wikipedia, much of their content is self-published and therefore most likely unreliable. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:50, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No significant and notable person - ramansoz (talk) raman 04:01, 4 April 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.