Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All India Ulema and Mashaikh Board


 * 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The result was   Withdrawn. Spartaz Humbug! 16:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

All India Ulema and Mashaikh Board

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A passing mention in the source listed on the page, in addition to many mentions from the org's press releases and those of related orgs like Noori Foundation (on the official websites of those related orgs) simply don't help it pass WP:GNG. Important note. All India Ulema and Mashaikh Board are apparently different from the All India Ulema Board, similar to the confusion between Dawat e Islami and Sunni Dawat e Islami. When taken together one might be tempted to think a single organization scrapes by the notability guideline, but from my searching they appear to be two separate, unrelated, non-notable groups. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:28, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:33, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:33, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * An alternative spelling: . Phil Bridger (talk) 09:22, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * What I'm seeing there is The Hindu news story already cited in the article as well as the same links to other organizations with ties to it. Still nothing of substance or even anything else which could be used as a reliable source. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:48, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The first two news results that I linked above are this from The Indian Express and this from The Times of India. Are these organisations with links to the All India Ulema and Mashaikh Board? And in what way do they lack substance or the ability to be used as reliable sources? Phil Bridger (talk) 10:29, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I checked the general search instead of a news search specificaly when you changed the spelling there, which is a major error on my part. In addition to those, I'm seeing at least two more sources mentioning the organization. There isn't much information available on there, but we do seem to have multiple sources now. With that in mind, it's imperative that I withdraw this nomination for deletion. MezzoMezzo (talk) 12:14, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:02, 23 September 2013 (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.