Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hassanain Rajabali (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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:36, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Hassanain Rajabali
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

The person does not seem notable and the sources do not seem reliable. More eyes needed. Anbu121 ( talk me ) 20:21, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete and salt. Not enough sources for WP:GNG. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:28, 27 July 2012 (UTC).
 * Neutral We are not experts in Shia Islam to know if he is or is not an expert in Shi'ite Islam. Many of the sources are youtube presentations. But when the Islamic Community of Afghans in Canada here invites him to make a presentation, clearly he must be a respected scholar of some degree in Islamic Shia theaological matters. --Artene50 (talk) 04:28, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. You don't need to be an expert in Shia Islam or anything else to assess a BLP for AfD. All that is needed is to find an adequate number of independent reliable sources to demonstrate the subject's notability. In this case a search of the links above shows that there aren't enough. Xxanthippe (talk).
 * Do not Delete. I know this man. He is definitely a well-known Muslim scholar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:F470:12:5:39AB:5DBD:6128:6F0C (talk) 17:00, 27 July 2012 (UTC) — 2607:F470:12:5:39AB:5DBD:6128:6F0C (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 2607:F470:12:5:39AB:5DBD:6128:6F0C (UTC).
 * Neutral Both Dan Barker and Richard Dawkins refer to Rajabali as a Muslim Scholar in their book. here
 * Weak Keep I added some independent sources to the article, so please take another look. Sources at Google News routinely refer to him as renowned or acclaimed, although some are behind paywalls. The article currently does not mention that he is a Hajji and a Shia, since Reliable Sources I found did not verify those descriptions, and he does not seem to emphasize those aspects of himself. --MelanieN (talk) 16:57, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 19:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Keep Several reliable sources have been added. The sources reveal that he is a prominent figure in the Islamic community. Article should be kept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyan2 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 6 August 2012 (UTC)  — Keyan2 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Weak delete. The Oklahoma Daily source looks reliable and in-depth, but one local newspaper story is not enough for WP:GNG for me, and none of the rest of the sources look very good. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:19, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: There are sources, but they aren't good enough (aren't strong, don't pass verfiability) to help this article clear hurtle of WP:GNG.Jimsteele9999 (talk) 01:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 23:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * delete fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 00:49, 14 August 2012 (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.