Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khwaja Shaikh Karimullah Shah Qadri-ul-Chishti Moinabadi

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 – no sources provided (written or online) so it cannot be verified. - KrakatoaKatie 11:34, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Khwaja Shaikh Karimullah Shah Qadri-ul-Chishti Moinabadi[edit]

This article is not verifiable. Not only does it lack sources; there is almost no hard biographical information that could possibly be sourced. One might wait for improvements, but the article has been in this state since October 06. Contested PROD in February, without rationale. -- Sent here as part of the Notability wikiproject. --B. Wolterding 08:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not notable. A Google search returns only one link: this Wikipedia page! There are no references whatsoever: for all we, or anyone else knows, this person might be entirely fictitious. If a reference can be found to verify notability of the subject then the article could be kept: but as it is, it fails notability and verifiability guidelines. EuroSong ^talk 08:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As a general rule, it tends to be a bad sign when an article has more problematic tags than text. This likely hoax is completely unverified, and probably unverifiable. Charlie-talk to me-what I've done 10:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Bad sign indeed. --Bren ^talk 13:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete, maybe even speedy. Holy crap, that's the most tags I've ever seen at the top of an article. The complete lack of GHits is also telling... Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 00:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
possible weak keep if sourced. The number of tags is a sad comment on our tagging system, & not a reason to delete. Sufi saints are not expected to have ghits. Certainly not unless searched by every possible name variation. This one needs an expert. DGG 04:46, 20 June 2007 (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.