Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdul Hamid (poet) (2nd nomination)


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 02:37, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Abdul Hamid (poet)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This article was first proposed for deletion earlier this year and the tag for it had been removed by a user named "Macpl", who objected to the deletion, but DID NOT PROVIDE A REASON WHY. Though Wikipedia does not declare that you must provide a reason for objecting, it is very unclear why he/she wishes to keep an article that has such obvious issues with the lack of citations. Of the two links provided in that article, one is already dead, and the second links to a 'newspaper' that includes a short blurb on the author's accomplishments. The second link DOES indicate that Abdul Hamid seems to be a real person, but the problem lies in the fact that it is only one source, and his poems are NOT peer-reviewed. In fact, a simple Google search of one or more of his poems leads back to ONLY a personal webpage that contains his poems, though the author claims that his works are "published". I'd like to add that several attempts had been made (mostly by whom I think is the original author) objecting the deletions in the past. Why do I believe that? Because before that original article (which contained absolutely no sources) was finally deleted by the admins here, it was previously salvaged by a contributor of Wikipedia who did not sign in, therefore providing ONLY his ip address. That one article was the ONLY article he seemed to be interested in. Though this does not necessarily indicate that it was actually him or her doing it, the timing of the intervention is uncanny and suspicious. I suspect this same exact individual much later on used a different IP to block another attempt at deletion.

The question is: Why are some of these people (if indeed several other people are involved) are trying SO HARD to save this article? I sense that the article is personally important to them, and by that, I feel that they are trying to protect an article that was created to immortalize the mediocre accomplishments of a person who would not normally be recognized in any other way but Wikipedia. There is most definitely a personal agenda attached to this article, which gives it further reason for deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AWDRacer (talk • contribs) 02:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete i see no reason why this decision should not be followed through on. no new material was added. however, i think this page i am writing on may be incorrectly formatted, i dont see previous afd's here. ill check the main log.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:42, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:42, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Normally i would say since he is a Manipuri poet, there will be Manipuri sources etc. But he has published only two volumes of poetry and in regional languages that is usually very thin. Without any awards - state and national or local language sources, this article is a delete.--Sodabottle (talk) 03:51, 16 May 2010 (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.