Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irfa̅n Shahid Alig


 * 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. The keep argument is not supported by WP policy--his own publications do not by themselves give him notability for an encyclopedia.  DGG ( talk ) 23:32, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Irfa̅n Shahid Alig

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Rather promotional piece about a non-notable economist who is allegedly known for Islamic banking. Can't find anything biographical on GBooks or GNews. I have checked every citation in the article, tagging the problematic ones; none of them give any substantial biographical coverage of the guy and some of the sources do not even mention his name. Please be aware that there is also someone called Irfan Shahîd (an orientalist), so be careful that you are dealing with the correct person when searching for notability. HyperGaruda (talk) 08:26, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 08:56, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 08:56, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 08:56, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete unless better sources are found. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC).
 * Delete as there are largely noticeable signs of no necessary sources and certainly no context to suggest any minimal notability, delete by all means. SwisterTwister   talk  06:31, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep the virtue that his articles have been published on many sites (given in the article references) and given the editors that are writing about the subject, it is thus clear that the subject complies with the notability criteria of Wikipedia. The article just needs to be re-formatted according to Wikipedia's standards. --Nazeer (talk) 12:54, 12 June 2016 (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.