Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic Research Foundation (second 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 no consensus to delete. W.marsh 16:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Islamic Research Foundation

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable organization. I could not find any reliable non-trivial secondary sources to establish notability. Applicable policy: WP:ORG. Previous nomination resulted in a Keep because at the time there was a copyright violation problem. However that was 6 months ago which was enough time to establish notability. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 01:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable organisation with no other sources, despite its claim to 'provide the much needed understanding about the truth and excellence of Islamic teachings - based on the glorious Qur'an' Nick mallory 03:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: 188 news articles and 19 publications, inc. one now in the Internet Archive. IMO a stub is warranted, and the unsourced material on the article needs to be removed. John Vandenberg 03:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Regardless, if the article is notable, editors should be able to reference it with sources. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 16:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * John (Jayvdb), the news articles and other publications are not another organization with similar name, Islamic Research Foundation International, Inc. (IRFI). 202.54.176.11 17:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Only 28 are specifically for the IRFI. At least 41 are about the Indian foundation and the publications are by this org, not IRFI. John Vandenberg 23:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I doubt there is any notable coverage of this organization and even if there is, why are editors not writing the article using that?--Matt57 (talk•contribs) 02:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Because Wikipedia is a work in progress ? John Vandenberg 03:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thats not a guideline and not all editors agree with it. If there's notability it would show up in this article. Since this AfD and the last, no one has been able to find any RS about this organization. Maybe the links you got were all trivial mentions where only the name was mentioned. That doesnt qualify. --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 11:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 10:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Certainly does not deserve such a long article, but probably deserves a small article.BobFromBrockley 14:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - I looked to see if this group has notability, but couldn't quickly find anything promising. I support delete until someone can demonstrate its notability.  The Behnam 16:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as there are plenty of news articles etc. Lurker  16:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Could you please demonstrate this? So far all of the references are from their own websites. The Behnam 17:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Lurker, the news articles are not about this organization in Mumbai. They are about Islamic Research Foundation International, Inc. (IRFI). 202.54.176.11 17:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Zakir Naik. All citations are from IRF itself. I've seen no indication that IRF is anything other than Naik himself, and even there we have had trouble finding sources.Proabivouac 03:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletions.    ITAQALLAH   16:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Definently not notable. Sources listed do not prove notablility.--Sefringle 05:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep; while Zakir Naik is the main component of this organisation, ultimate that article is merely a bio, while this organisation is a trust that holds the assets and involves many people. It is the main body behind a library, Peace TV and "Islamic International School", now mentioned on the article.  IMO this ORG is as notable as Hillsong Church.  One aspect I havent added to the article is a fair amount of press related to a bombing.   Please bear in mind that the article is so far only comprised of facts sourced to English media; many more references will be available in Urdu, Arabic, etc.  John Vandenberg 02:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I must say that your inclusion of information related to a completely different Islamic Research Foundation does not inspire confidence in your assurances. Another source was merely a yellow pages style directory with contact information accompanied by IRF's own self-description. The Saudi Gazette and Milli Gazette are of dubious value here, while mainstream sources such as Times of India and The Hindu mention IRF only in passing, and fail to establish notability.Proabivouac 03:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the "Imam Reza" citation that I had added yesterday; it wasnt until today that I had realised there was also an Iranian group of the same name. However, note that the statements you have removed were in the article before the Afd and were a copyvio of IRF.  My citation was merely as outside verification of the existence of a reading room and resources. Your removal of the Calcutta Research Group "directory entry" is a bit silly as is a reputable organisation, and its directory was being used to verify only basic facts.  I have removed the Saudi Gazette and Milli Gazette sources. You've not mentioned why it isnt notable due to Peace TV, the school, or the three sources that are not trivial:   . John Vandenberg 05:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Peace TV is an article you've just now created which is similarly based upon questionable sources and a few passing mentions. What is the actual content besides videotapes of Naik? A real active television network will have a whole lot more written on it than what I see there.
 * As for your "not trivial" sources, are Express India and Indian Muslims respected news sources? The Hindu is a famous paper, but it doesn't mention the IRF at all, and the reference to the school is trivial (incidentally, how many people attend this school?)Proabivouac 06:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment I would like to add Peace TV to this AfD, as the creator of Islamic Research Foundation has just created it using the same sources and is appealing to its existence (above) to establish the notability of this organization..Proabivouac 06:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If you think that Peace TV doesnt meet our standards, feel free to put an Afd header on it and link it to this discussion. I created the article to collate sourced facts about an organisation that is tightly entwined with IRF.  I am happy to merge the content on that article, however I have not yet been able to determine the details of the link between IRF and Peace TV. John Vandenberg 14:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge this article might as well be merged into Zakir Naik along with Peace TV. If this organization does something notable, then it can have its own article.  At the moment, it is just not notable enough, sorry.  --Abnn 18:00, 20 May 2007 (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.