Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mulla Hamzah Gilani


 * 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. No objection to speedy renom if this does not improve sourcing soon Spartaz Humbug! 23:59, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Mulla Hamzah Gilani

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. Fails WP:GNG.Contains original research and unsourced material. The references are fake and redirect back to the same page. Pixarh (talk) 14:00, 25 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete: as I see no better improvement. No evidence of notability either. JugniSQ (talk) 08:44, 26 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I think that the user Pixarh behaved as disruptive editor. he shows tendencies like this:

1.Is tendentious: continues editing an article or group of articles in pursuit of a certain point for an extended time despite opposition from other editors. Tendentious editing does not consist only of adding material; some tendentious editors engage in disruptive deletions as well. An example is repeated deletion of reliable sources posted by other editors. 2.Cannot satisfy Wikipedia:Verifiability; fails to cite sources, cites unencyclopedic sources, misrepresents reliable sources, or manufactures original research. 3.Engages in "disruptive cite-tagging"; adds unjustified tags to an article when the content tagged is already sourced, uses such tags to suggest that properly sourced article content is questionable. 4.Does not engage in consensus building: a. repeatedly disregards other editors' questions or requests for explanations concerning edits or objections to edits;b. repeatedly disregards other editors' explanations for their edits. 5.Rejects or ignores community input: resists moderation and/or requests for comment, continuing to edit in pursuit of a certain point despite an opposing consensus from impartial editors.--m,sharaf (talk) 15:17, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You are already presenting your incompetent and vague complaints at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Use appropriate pages and save us all time. Pixarh (talk) 16:56, 26 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.Pixarh (talk) 14:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment. Totally unintentionally, I suspect, the nominator has failed to WP:AGF on the part of the article's creator, who to me seems probably sincere but needs to learn more about creating and editing Wikipedia articles. The references in the article are almost certainly not faked, but malformed because the article creator has used the wrong template. The article creator has then compounded his problems by mostly using Hijri years rather than standard CE dates. The book which the first reference (with the only CE date in the entire article) is intended to point to happens to be listed at the bottom of the article - it is almost certainly this work (though probably the fourth and last volume, for which I can not find a link, rather than the linked third volume). The other references simply have too little information to be identifiable, though the third link seems to be intended to refer to some work published in the mid-1980s that was in turn referring to Hazin Lahiji, and the fifth to a posthumous edition of something by Agha Bozorg Tehrani. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find any accessible online coverage (beyond mentions in indexes) of this Iranian scholar of about 300 years ago - so unless the article creator comes back and either repairs his citations or lists his references fully enough, either here or at the article talk page, for others to check, we have no way of telling whether reliable sources cover him in enough detail to make him notable, or do little more than mention his name. PWilkinson (talk) 13:38, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment - this article should be not be deleted until reviewed by a Farsi speaker an/or expert in Islamic history. I added his name in Farsi and search shows up various sources confirming his existence and people discussing him in articles and books, but it's beyond my capability. —Мандичка YO 😜 03:15, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Actually I did WP:AGF when I kept asking the creator of the article to improve his article and even introduced him to pages for policies and other important Wikipedia guideline pages so it is easier for the editor to save his article if it stands at all both at User talk:Mehdi ghaed and Talk:Mulla Hamzah Gilani. It was only after the creator kept arguing and removing (even maintenance) templates without any improvement or a single edit that the article was up for AfD because even the creator was unable to or not willing to edit the article to make it encyclopedic. Pixarh (talk) 17:26, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * keep: i think that some references such as Corbin namely(Henry Corbin and Sayyed Jalāl-al-Din Āštiāni, eds., Anthologie des philosophes iraniens depuis le XVIIe siècle jusqu’à nos jours/Montaḵabāt-i az āṯār-e ḥokamāʾ-e elāhi-e Irān az ʿaṣr-e Mir Dāmād o Mir Fendereski tā zamān-e ḥāżer, 4 vols., Paris and Tehran) is notable as iranica encyclopedia refere to it alsohere..but about my edit versus Pixarh, it is clear that first he claimed the person is contemporary while i told him this claim is not true. besides he unfortunately tagged my page but according to Disruptive editing he does not understand how to correctly edit, or because they lack the social skills or competence necessary to work collaboratively. of course this edition by him is not intentional. however i try to reach a consensus but this user Does not engage in consensus building and at the same time try to report the page for deletion.--m,sharaf (talk) 18:47, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * comment:What are you talking about? Your references were redirecting back to the article itself and you were not even accepting it. None of us editors have anything against you please I told you before not to take this personally. You were given enough time to improve the article, you chose not to so do not blame other editors for that. I have only been trying to push you improve your article throughout my conversations and encouraging you for that by sending you links of helpful pages at your talk page so where is this "disruptive" coming from? Pixarh (talk) 18:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Alternative transliterations?  Can any Farsi speakers suggest alternative transliterations that might lead to sources in Germanic or Romance languages other than English?   As it now stands, the article is woefully inadequate and may need to be deleted.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:46, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:20, 9 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Onel 5969  TT me 20:02, 17 November 2015 (UTC) *keep - I, as creator of the article, mentioned some notable sources such Corbin.This person also could encompass "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". I think these condition satified by writing the book Hekmat sadeqiyyah which Corbin also referred to it.--m,sharaf (talk) 19:11, 27 November 2015 (UTC) Note: !vote struck, because you are only allowed to vote once. You may, of course, comment any number of times, so I have left that be. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 06:37, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - I relisted last week, hoping that another editor's plea for a Farsi speaker (3 weeks ago) would happen. Hasn't occurred. The article's creator seems unwilling to put any work in on improving the article. Searches returned nothing to show they meet notability criteria, and the current article doesn't appear to state any claim to notability. He was a philosopher and a pupil of a famous philosopher.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:43, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is well known that historical topics, especially those where the literature tends to be written in languages other than English, are under-represented in Wikipedia.  Thus, I'm willing to give this the benefit of the doubt.  Appears to be cited in History Of Islamic Philosophy, but the digitized text is hard to work with (so, again, benefit of the doubt).  -- RoySmith (talk) 22:59, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Appears to be the same person as Hamza Gilani from Wikishia. Other wikis don't meet our WP:RS requirements, but that may be a jumping-off point for further research -- RoySmith (talk) 23:08, 29 November 2015 (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.