Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Ghulam Mohiyyuddin 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 no consensus WP:NPASR. So Why 15:20, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Ghulam Mohiyyuddin 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)

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) 21:26, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:46, 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]

Strong Keep The person is a founder of a religious movement, played part in Pakistan movement, his contributions are widely recognized in Pakistan. Passes WP:BIO. And yes he belonged to the time when internet was not available in most of the places. Thanks, Knightrises10 (talk) 11:12, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You know You need to establish the WP:N by providing significant coverage in independent RS. How does he passes WP:BIO? Merely throwing support votes is not going to work. --Saqib (talk) 11:17, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as failing notability criteria. The sources are mostly not independent and the only one that may be is just a biography. Dom from Paris (talk) 07:26, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Pakistan is a developing country and moreover, the subject of the article belonged to the time when internet was not available at most places, and therefore there isn't much coverage on internet regarding him. Knightrises10 (talk) 07:51, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not a sufficient justification to keep the article. --Saqib (talk) 06:47, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This person was certainly a notable person. If allowed some time, I can try to add some more references to it. Ngrewal1 (talk) 00:35, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For now, you can establish the WP:N here in order to rescue the page from getting deleted. --Saqib (talk) 06:38, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:35, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I spent some more time on it and all I could find was 2 references to Dawn (newspaper) and 1 reference to GoogleBooks which I added to the article. He died in 1974 and this was the best I could do. Ngrewal1 (talk) 00:37, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All those sources still fails to establish notability. --Saqib (talk) 06:45, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NEXIST as evidenced by the current references, including those added recently by Ngrewal1. — kashmīrī ^TALK 06:40, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ngrewal1 failed to establish the WP:N.. He cited a few references but does not provided significant coverage via multiple, independent RS as required by GNG. --Saqib (talk) 06:45, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To me, it suffices that an academic book published by Bloomsbury Publishing mentions that the devotion to the subject and his father is the very reason pilgrims visit Golra Sharif, a place that sees millions of pilgrims annually. What else do you expect? A daily appearance on Fox News? — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:07, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be kind enough to quote the excerpt here? --Saqib (talk) 10:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The principal reason for which so many people visit Golra Sharif is devotion to the present pīr as well as his father (Babuji) and Grandfather (Pir Meher Ali Shah)."[1] — kashmīrī ^TALK 07:53, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closing admin At-least two other articles of similar nature created by the same user were deleted recently. Syed Shah Abdul Haq Gilani and Syed Shah Abdul Haq Gillani. --Saqib (talk) 06:49, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib: Aren't you repeating or writing the same exact name spellings above twice? Syed Shah Abdul Haq Gilani. I don't understand the logic here. If some article creator's one article is deleted on Wikipedia, are you trying to imply here that all his created articles are then 'suspect' and should be deleted? I hope each individual article is judged on its merits. Ngrewal1 (talk) 21:09, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There were two seperate pages. I don't know if they were of same person? I just wanted to let the closing admin know that the creator of this bio has previously created pages on people having no notablity. --Saqib (talk) 06:59, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Saqib: I can understand anybody's irritation over finding some article creator's attempts to create 2 separate articles for the same person on Wikipedia. Personally it appeared to me that the subject of the article Syed Ghulam Mohiyyuddin Gilani (1891 – 1974) may have had a substantial number of spiritual followers in his local area and therefore was very notable and respectable person to his followers. To be fair to him, I spent some time on the article and added 3 new references to the article and said in my comment that was the best I could do because of the times he lived in. I know I ran into a WP:NEXIST situation as mentioned above by kashmiri. Hope you don't take it personally, Saqib. Ngrewal1 (talk) 02:25, 3 September 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.