Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tariq Farid

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 keep. MBisanz ^talk 04:49, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Tariq Farid

Tariq Farid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Entrepreneur. Is he notable? Notes: the article about Farid's company has been deleted five times as spam. The creator of this article Famzz states that he is Faheem Mumtaz - User:Faheemmumtaz is permanently blocked for spamming and sockpuppetry. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

• This Article on Triq farid is perfactly Ok. As is is now a famous man and have won the bigest awad in the business world. Now after the edits the article is ferfactly fine in every aspect. -- famzz

• I am here on wikipedia for the first time is is never blocked in the past. Some one else(May be our competators) used our names and farid comapny name to spam and get blocked. Even I dont know how to Appeal. If I was a spammer so Why should i use my name again? -- famzz —Preceding undated comment was added at 15:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC).

• Keep. This version bears no resemblance to the one I looked at, before a flurry of editing activity, which also brought in sources I did not find. Thanks to all editors, and to Bdb for bringing this to my attention. Delete--article about a non-notable business person, whose sole claim to fame is an award from a minor organization. Poorly written and under-referenced article is a somewhat strange mixture of praise and condemnation; no matter whether this person is praise- or blameworthy, he is not notable enough for inclusion in WP. Drmies (talk) 21:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
• Reluctant keep - I unsuccessfully prodded the article earlier. The article is dreadful, and it is only the latest of several dreadful contributions (some others of which I unsuccessfully tried to delete) regarding one of the interests of Tariq Farid. I assume that the original creator of the article is either Mr. Farid himself (although I would think that Mr. Farid would have better English) or someone who is very loyal to him. However, I came to the reluctant conclusion that the article deserves to be retained because it appears to me that the guy is notable (in spite of the worst efforts of the article's creator). Mr. Farid established a franchise business with more than 800 outlets, I found third-party confirmation of that factoid and the "entrepreneur" award, it is clear that he is a controversial figure for his efforts to establish a mosque and an Islamic school in the U.S., and I found other third-party sources about him. BTW: do see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Faheemmumtaz.Orlady (talk) 02:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
• Keep It . This Article is quite interesting and tell us that the spirit can must have in every man and now he is getting award for his unforgettable success and Mr Farid is one of the best-known entrepreneurs of the Franchise revolution. So i strongly recommended this article is perfect and amazing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandla2sandi (talk • contribs) 05:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

— Sandla2sandi (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Orlady (talk) 05:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

And this particular single edit is singularly unhelpful. Drmies (talk) 18:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

• Keep, and not reluctantly. Why should we be reluctant about keeping an article on a subject with significant coverage in reliable sources? Having a Wikipedia article on a subject is not a reward for good behaviour - it's simply a recognition that sources exist on the basis of which an article can be written. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
• Keep. The article is well-sourced, and the subject is -- I think -- sufficiently notable. —Bdb484 (talk) 18:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE: Looking at the original version of the article, I can see how this discussion got started. There has, however, been substantial work done on the article, and there's really no reason to delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdb484 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

• DELETE THIS SITE*Knowing Tariq Farid, his business, personal life and his agressive business attitude, I can attest that this site is not come close to describing the man that he really is. In fact this site is a rediculous and inaccurate depiction of Farid. Farid is a [unsourced biographical information removed Uncle G (talk) 12:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)] ALL OF WHICH THIS SITE REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGE. This site puts more credibility on newspaper reporting than legal court filings. DUMP THIS LUNATIC SITE REGARDING TARIQ FARID.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Eaowners (talk • contribs) 19:38, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
  • I have removed portions of the above under the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy. Uncle G (talk) 12:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

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.