Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gesudaraz I

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. Sandstein 14:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gesudaraz I[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)

Similar to Syed Soleman Shah, which was deleted as it appeared to be a hoax. This article is also suspected of being a hoax. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive998#Possible hoax on Syed Soleman Shah also. IWI (chat) 11:19, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are also suspected hoaxes from the same author.

IWI (chat) 11:34, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’m also nominating this article:

IWI (chat) 19:59, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:40, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:40, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:40, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:40, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:40, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all as hoaxes Spiderone 21:39, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment IWI asked me to check the sources for this article. Most of them are not live links, but of the ones that are, this is what I found:

Ref 2 is in Farsi and the file doesn’t support ‘find in page’.
Ref 8 I can’t get to open.
Ref 9 is in English and is a proper google book link, so we can see it does support the content of the article. There at least was a person of this name and the bare bones of the article are based in fact.
Ref 11 is in English but does not support the content of the article
Ref 18 says it’s in Arabic but it isn’t - it appears to be Farsi. I ran a text search on گیسو دراز and came up with nothing.
Ref 21 I can’t get the link to open.
Ref 22 is to an archived book in Arabic. I ran a text search on گیسو دراز and came up with nothing.
Ref 23 is to an archived book in Farsi. I ran a text search on گیسو دراز and came up with nothing.

I also checked the refs for Syed Adam Banuri and found that:

Ref 1 does refer to Sheikh Adam Banuri but does not mention the dates contained in the article
Ref 2 also refers to Banuri (so he definitely existed) but provides the Hijri date for his death of 1053 (ie 1643) and says nothing of his birth date. This ref supports the text in the article giving his death as in 1643 in Medina, but the birth date is unsourced and impossible.
Ref 3 again clearly indicates that the historical person existed.
Ref 4 is a snippet view with material not related to the part of the article it allegedly supports.
Ref 6 supports the text
Ref 7 supports the text
Ref 11 refers to Banuri but does not mention Shah Jihan sending him on the Hajj
Ref 12 is in Urdu so I can’t read it
Ref 13 is in some dodgy file format I’m not opening
Ref 14 repeats his date of death but does not support his place of burial.

Mccapra (talk) 01:16, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The sources for Syed Qaaf - one is dead and the other does not seem to mention syed Qaaf, though the text doesn’t render properly in some sections so it’s possible there’s a ref in there I can’t see. Mccapra (talk) 01:22, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mccapra: Just so you know, you mentioned doing text searches in some scanned books which aren't possible to search in (they're just a bundle of photographs, as far as the computer is concerned), so the search returning no results doesn't indicate one way or another whether the subject is mentioned in the book. (That said, it would be silly to expect anyone to hunt through an entire book by hand for a mention of the subject, so these refs without page numbers are kind of useless...) —{{u|Goldenshimmer}}｜✝️｜they/their｜😹｜T/C｜☮️｜John 15:12｜🍂 01:01, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi yes thanks I realise this. In fact though all but one of the sources I checked (See above) did support ‘find in page’ so I can be certain the key term was missing. Mccapra (talk) 01:08, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

cool :) Thanks for taking the time to check them by the way Mccapra! —{{u|Goldenshimmer}}｜✝️｜they/their｜😹｜T/C｜☮️｜John 15:12｜🍂 01:12, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all Simply fails WP:V. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:42, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per the above, with many thanks to Mccapra for carrying out all this verification. Fish+Karate 09:35, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I’m happy to do this whenever needed. Mccapra (talk) 10:18, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per Mccapra. Catrìona (talk) 12:57, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all unless someone can find some better sources to demonstrate they meet WP:V. PohranicniStraze (talk) 01:02, 21 December 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.