Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Khaki


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. with the understanding that the scope of this article might shift to be about the tomb. Liz Read! Talk! 04:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Adam Khaki

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Historical scholarship does not document, much less discuss, our subject except in reference to the location of his tomb. None of the references in this article are about our subject. The single reference cited in his biography section is self-published work. As per the rules of Wikipedia, notability is not herited and therefore as there is no sign of independent notability of our subject, this article should be deleted. Jaunpurzada (talk) 15:20, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Islam. -- Jaunpurzada (talk) 15:20, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:34, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep: It took all of a minute to find just such a paper precisely locate the subject's tomb, and here is another paper, and another, discussing the shrine. More generally, there are quite sufficient Google Scholar hits in English alone to surmise that the subject is an important figure in certain religious circles. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:03, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Reply: Exactly, they discuss the shrine/location and not the personality who is buried there, which supports my AfD. Jaunpurzada (talk) 17:58, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Not really. If you really think there is no other material, that would just mean the article should be re-titled and rescoped to be just about the tomb. Other material exists however. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep The sources above provide sufficient coverage for at least the tomb and shrine, and I think it is sufficient for Khaki as well, or at least indicates the probability that there is enough coverage that will turn up. Even if a consensus develops that Khaki is not notable, the article can always be rescoped.  The Night Watch     (talk)   20:58, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep If this needs a retitle about his tomb, that might be fine, but he definitely has a good amount of coverage as a figure. The time period deserves more recognition in terms of figures, and so a well-sourced figure like this deserves credit. PickleG13 (talk)


 * 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.