Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aligarh Institute Gazette


 * 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. S warm  ♠  06:21, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Aligarh Institute Gazette

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A defunct University publications started by Syed Ahmad Khan and then stopped after his death in 1898. Has no stand-alone notability and all reliable sources mention the publication passing in relation to Syed or its another editor Theodore Beck. Case of inherited notability. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 06:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 06:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

This is not defunct publication. See here- http://nvonews.com/rahat-abrar-is-new-editor-of-amu-gazette/, http://www.amu.ac.in/about3.jsp?did=9432. Also search in the internet and you will find that it was not stopped in 1898. It has also been archived in the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/16421/16/16_bibliography.pdf. The latest editions can be found here -http://www.amu.ac.in/gazette.jsp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arifjwadder (talk • contribs) 11:14, 24 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Also see the list of positive microfilms at Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi. The link is here- http://nehrumemorial.nic.in/images/pdf/library/List%20of%20%20holdings%20on%20Microfilm.pdf. This proves its importance and notability. Do not merely put deletion tag. Thanks! Arifjwadder (talk) 11:23, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I vote to keep. The article is poorly written, but that is another issue.  The references I checked seemed fine.  Be sure the final articles is about the Institute and not just the notable members of the institute.Lucas559 (talk) 15:46, 25 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Note The above vote be counted when closing.Arifjwadder (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I concur with you. The references are most notable. Some of the references are there in the government documents and in books which have been written by British writers century back. User talk:Lucas559 request you to vote in bold. Thanks. Arifjwadder (talk) 16:42, 29 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. The references I mentioned above are reliable and note worthy. This is a historical gazette in which freedom movement of India could be found. Arifjwadder (talk) 11:47, 26 September 2015 (UTC)


 * keep. The references cited above and in the article are fine and authentic. Few are from government organisation which does not give a second thought. The article has a lot of scope for enlargement. It meets notability criteria. EyThink (talk) 19:16, 26 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge to Syed Ahmad Khan. Can't see any reason for it to have a full article.--Rsrikanth05 (talk) 22:48, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please have a re-read of the article with the additions I've made. If after that you wish to uphold your !vote, I'd like to hear why. -- Sam Sailor Talk! 06:45, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * My opinion remains the same. It doesn't seem to satisfy N to exist as a standalone article.--Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:45, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Strong keep. Meets WP:N. Under WP:ABOUTSELF it is acceptable as a source for facts under WP:V. The references mentioned above are fine and acceptable with some references from Nehru Memorial Library, India makes it more notable. Thus Topic notability is established. Thanks.- Rajib56789 (talk) 06:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DavidLeighEllis (talk) 18:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Redirect See below. and merge to Syed Ahmad Khan. Editor Arifjwadder has demonstrated verifiability, not notability. Having the microform preserved does not equate to significant coverage. Fails WP:GNG. --Bejnar (talk) 04:01, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * A book was recently released on the subject. The released book entirely is on Aligarh Institute Gazette This book is based on a critical study of The Aligarh Institute Gazette covering the period 1866 97, a phase when India was slowly transiting to the modern age, with the spread of new political, social, educational and religious ideas. Numerous social movements too, were gathering steam during this period to reform the Indian society. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, the founder of The Aligarh Institute Gazette, fought against obscurantist ideas and persuaded the Indian people to accept the impending changes.. What more is needed for notability??? Arifjwadder (talk) 18:08, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment: Please have a re-read of the article with the additions I've made. If after that you wish to uphold your !vote, I'd like to hear why. -- Sam Sailor Talk! 06:45, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please have a re-read of the article with the additions I've made. If after that you wish to uphold your !vote, I'd like to hear why. -- Sam Sailor Talk! 06:45, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:SNOW and suggest . There is not just sufficient significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, there is an overwhelming abundance of sources, and subject passes WP:NPERIODICAL/WP:NMEDIA/WP:GNG with flying colors. I have done a slight rewrite with a few additions, and I have added ~10 cite books, but you could add several dozens more. And that's cite books only. -- Sam Sailor Talk! 06:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


 * One sentence mentions, in sections which are primarily about Syed or Beck or 19th century muslim movements is not significant coverage. Yes the name shows up in Google Books, that is not the point. The point is notability. It does not qualify, nor would I expect it to, under Notability (academic journals), so if it were to qualify it needs to do so under the general notability guidelines. The shotgun approach of just adding citations to the article, such as  which just has three very passing mentions on pages 212, 314, and 317, does not produce notability. The substantive two pages of the contribution of  if carried forward in other books would do that, but passing mentions, often just cites, don't work. --Bejnar (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


 * This book released is on Aligarh Institute Gazette This book is based on a critical study of The Aligarh Institute Gazette covering the period 1866 97, a phase when India was slowly transiting to the modern age, with the spread of new political, social, educational and religious ideas. Numerous social movements too, were gathering steam during this period to reform the Indian society. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, the founder of The Aligarh Institute Gazette, fought against obscurantist ideas and persuaded the Indian people to accept the impending changes.. Will you still say passing mention??? Arifjwadder (talk) 18:16, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I withdraw my objection; however when two out of the first three citations that are added to an article are mere mentions, it is difficult to continue evaluating them. Has anyone actually seen a copy of Asghar Abbas's book (as translated from Urdu by Syed Asim Ali)? Is that why it is listed in "Further reading" and is not cited? (Note: Syed Asim Ali should probably not be treated as an author.) --Bejnar (talk) 21:50, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I did not read the copy of the book but it can be found here http://www.amazon.in/Print-Culture-Asghar-Abbas/dp/9384082295. It will take some time when the contents of the book is reviewed by some other writer and we can have the glimpse of the contents. Thanks.- Arifjwadder (talk) 22:10, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * For future reference you might keep in mind the guideline at Citing sources which says: Don't cite a source unless you've seen it for yourself. and the suggestion at Further reading : Some editors list sources that they hope to use in the future to build the article in Further reading. This is neither encouraged nor prohibited. Many editors prefer to list such sources on the article's talk page. --Bejnar (talk) 22:35, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:42, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:42, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America1000 16:42, 4 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Publication widely cited as an authoritative or representative voice of liberal Muslims in India 100 years or so ago (particularly on ideas of education). Asghar Abbas's book only comes out in 6 weeks, so nobody can possibly have read it yet (except in-house editors, external reviewers, the author's close friends and colleagues, none of whom could appropriately be citing it on Wikipedia pre-publication), but its existence does point towards notability. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 19:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: User:Arifjwadder, User:EyThink and User: Rajib56789 have been indef blocked for socking. See Sockpuppet investigations/Arifjwadder/Archive. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:53, 7 October 2015 (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.