Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hazrat Khwaja Muhammad Akbar Greeb Nawaz Chishti Basir puri


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:35, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Hazrat Khwaja Muhammad Akbar Greeb Nawaz Chishti Basir puri

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. The article asserts the notability of this person but provides no evidence of it and I can't find any. Fails WP:N and WP:VER andy (talk) 09:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

wikipesia offerd the deletation of this page and asked about the notability of this person.i would like to inform that the person which we are talking about was the prominent sufi of basir pur.Basir pur is a town in pakistan as u can check the details of basir pur on wikipedia by typing basir pur in the search box.Any one can read about the institute of this personality where the students come to get the spirtual education of sufism.A detail discription of sufies in available on wikipedia like Hazrat baba fareed ud din,khwaja moin ud din chishti, baba bulleh shah,hazrat amir-e- khusro.According to my opnion this page should not be deleted because it contain a relevent information about sufies —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadeedudin (talk • contribs) 10:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - No citations. No references. No evidence of notability. As stated at Wikipedia:Verifiability:
 * The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia already has been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed. Esasus (talk) 13:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment' Considering the time and place the subject is from, possible sources would likely be non-English and in print form. The article is brand new as well. Edward321 (talk) 14:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Possible candidate for a Speedy as per G3, a Google search as well as another to check for a possible misspelling  both return no relevant results.ZappyGun  (talk to me)  What I've done for Wikipedia  15:00, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've no idea whether this person is notable, but using a Google search to claim that this is blatant vandalism is simply ridiculous. How prevalent do you think internet usage was 100 years ago in Punjab? Phil Bridger (talk) 23:02, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's clearly not vandalism - how silly! But in the absence of any other evidence Google is the best one can do. It's the author's job to provide the references, if they exist. andy (talk) 00:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment That's why I stated it was a Possible candidate for Speedy deletion, I didn't outright state it should be nominated or nominate it myself, because I was Assuming Good Faith and presuming the article wasn't "Ha ha, foreigners have long funny names" vandalism. ZappyGun (talk to me)  What I've done for Wikipedia  15:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * In the context of this afd, is that Keep or Delete? andy (talk) 15:55, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Being a holy man and writing a lot of books does not count much for notability.  One must use examples, give citations, and show how the person is notable. Bearian (talk) 20:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fritzpoll (talk) 09:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, due the absence of any verifiable sources. No prejudice to recreation if such sources can be found. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Deletenot notable
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions.  -- the wub  "?!"  14:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - The author is an SPA newbie and from his rather wild edits to various Talk pages I don't think he undertands wikipedia procedures. Reviewing the article's history I see that he twice attempted to blank the page (once as an anon IP) but well meaning people restored it. He now seems to have abandoned the article entirely and I very much doubt if it will get the references it needs to establish notability. andy (talk) 15:52, 3 March 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.