Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dar ul uloom bhera sharif


 * 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.

Dar ul uloom bhera sharif
The result was   Speedy Delete (G12). Alexf(talk) 09:46, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Unreferenced essay, failing WP:OR and WP:VER andy (talk) 11:25, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - as per nom. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 18:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, without prejudice to re-creation. This is very hard to follow - Beginning of the 19th century is considered as an educational deterioration for the Muslims. Separation and distance from awareness snatched the dignified status of the Muslims from them.... - but it would appear to be about a Muslim school or educator; it's hard to tell.  That institution might be worthy of an article, but this text appears entirely unsalvageable. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 22:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There's a perfectly sensible article at Darul uloom which links to several Darul ulooms. I'm guessing that this article might be something that would link in too, except that it's such gibberish that it's hard to tell exactly what it's about, nor whether it is in fact sufficiently notable to link there. andy (talk) 22:45, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Knowing that, this text makes a lot more sense. We have an article on Bhera, apparently the city where this is, which mentions "Dar-ul-‘Uloom Al-Muhammadiya Al-Ghawthiyya".  This may be an alternative transliteration of something mentioned in the text.  We also have an article on Muhammad Karam Shah al-Azhari, who seems to be a significant figure, and who may figure in this text as well.  This probably is notable.  All of these articles seem to be written in a similar panegyric style, however.  - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 01:02, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It's the "probably" that's the problem. There are no references, incomprehensible English and a very strong POV. Even if it really is notable it needs a ground-up rewrite. andy (talk) 08:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Copyvio. I've just noticed that the article is a copyvio of http://www.darululoombherasharif.com/e_index.html and related pages. There's a copyright notice on the front page. andy (talk) 09:40, 3 November 2009 (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.