Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmad Hussain 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. Consensus seems to be that there are insufficient independent and reliable sources to establish notability. clpo13_(talk) 19:28, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmad Hussain Gilani[edit]

[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)

Bringing to AfD after deprod-ed on the grounds that there are books about him which establish notability. However, I could not find the books mentioned (in an English language search) about him, anything else per WP:BEFORE to establish notability, or to confirm any of the biographical details. Might require an Urdu speaker to save this. Kazamzam (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Pakistan. Kazamzam (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment a search in Arabic script for his given name and spiritual name yield me nothing indicating notability so I’d be inclined to delete unless anyone can show decent sources in Urdu. Mccapra (talk) 23:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Week Keep I have tried to get some sources in urdu but i have only found 2 references. Kkb091 (talk) 09:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you clarify what these references are? They seem to be somewhere between an homage and an obituary based on the Google translation. This seems more like a personal page and therefore I don't know if it meets a level of reliable/independent source to establish notability. The publications are established but I think these articles are questionable. Thank you for finding them though! Kazamzam (talk) 21:39, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  Well I am talking about these two sources, boths are from well known news media. [1] [2] and also [3], there are also other sources about the subject but belongs to blogging and WordPress sites. Kkb091 (talk) 18:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  The third reference is just a Scribd upload from a WordPress site, so that is not a good source. The first two sources are from well-known news media but they seem to be written about the Urs and are therefore memorializing Gilani rather than reporting factual information about him. I don't think these particular articles are useful for establishing notability and I think they should be removed from the article. I have already removed the Scribd citation. Kazamzam (talk) 23:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 20:35, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - My deprod was referring to books listed in the Books on him section of the article. This section has since been removed by Kkb091. ~Kvng (talk) 17:12, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This section was totally unsourced. I tried to get some reliable references to add them but unfortunately mostly references belongs to Internet archive and WordPress. So I think it is better to remove that section to vote for Keep. Kkb091 (talk) 19:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the two sources in the article are definitely not independent coverage. If that’s all we can find then notability isn’t established. Mccapra (talk) 23:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 17:10, 1 January 2024 (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.