Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdul Hakim Ansari


 * 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. After examining the discussion and also the likelihood of a WP:SOCK violation, and the views of those not emotionally involved with the topic, I believe there is a clear and actionable consensus to close this as a deletion. KaisaL (talk) 17:03, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Abdul Hakim Ansari

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article written most likely by the followers of this little-known religious figure exclusively on the basis of self-published sources. So little known was the person that Google returns virtually zero meaningful hits on his name, except for the homepage of their group - which is surprising for a country with such a large English-speaking population. I suggest deleting the article as no evidence of notability or even significance is presented at the moment. — kashmiri  TALK  12:03, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Very frequently, devotees of local South Asian religious figures create detailed articles on Wikipedia using self-published sources. What I'm seeing here, despite the large number of citations, is an article that is either cited by the subject's own work or the work of two followers, one from 1999 and one from 2010. This is a basic fail of WP:GNG, as there's no reliably sourced evidence here that the subject or his books were notable or received any coverage outside his website and circle of self-publishing followers. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:27, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. The sourcing reminds me of Articles for deletion/Sultan Mohammad Najib Ur Rehman all over again, i.e. a considerable fiefdom of refs, but all self-published. - HyperGaruda (talk) 07:05, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep, it also reminded me of that case, although the scale here is much smaller: only four articles (this one, Tauheediyah, Muhammad Hanif Khan and Muhammad Siddique Dar‎, all of them self-sourced), one editor (likely also editing under IP - 193.11.69.62 and 77.238.61.141) and one opponent (Imranlatif786) whose contributions show in-fighting within the group... Interesting :) —  kashmiri  TALK  20:46, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

*Keep I have a suggestion. National Library of Pakistan is also the national repository of all published literature in Pakistan. There is enough material for research on the topic. Being dependent on googling is not enough due to language other than english. Wikipedia is a good source to start research. Don't think more on fewer cited sources coming out of one or two universities. Try to improve the page if you think something is not adequate. I will try to add some suggestions for further readings pretty soon on wikipedia. I believe construction is better than destruction. 77.238.61.141 (talk) 00:35, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Abdul Hakim Ansari is the founder of a spiritual chain Tauheediyah. Some books have been written on and about him. He is author of notable books that have considerable influence in religious as well as research literature on spirituality and islamic mysticism. His books have been translated into English and Arabic. His authored books are available in renouned libraries and research repositories including Library of Congress and are circulated worldwide. He has followers in many countries through out the globe. His teachings have also been explained onward in renouned books and reliable published sources by his followers. It is also admissible that few people may have conflict of their interest. Anyhow, this page is not the primary source on the subject.Syed Rahmat Ullah Shah (talk) 18:31, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm still not seeing any proof of this claimed notability mentioned by the user and IP address which left more or less the same exact comments on Articles for deletion/Tauheediyah. In fact, there isn't even any hard proof that any of these claims are true. If there are no sources to be found - and nobody has tried providing reliable, third party sources - then it doesn't matter what more IP addresses claim about research that isn't being done. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:31, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Crossing out the IP edit. : please read WP:SOCK. I am posting it only here as a warning, because if I report it to admins your account will likely be blocked. — kashmiri  TALK  10:20, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * kashmiri! Go ahead. Don't warn me of anything. Keep your warnings to your puppet. Focus on what you are doing.Syed Rahmat Ullah Shah (talk) 13:43, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as there's still noticeably troubles between the information and sourcing, this is best deleted for now until everything of concern can be improved. SwisterTwister   talk  05:50, 1 July 2016 (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.