Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharif Zahir


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Later participants who had the opportunity to review the competing source assessments gave a clear consensus to delete. RL0919 (talk) 04:14, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Sharif Zahir

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Coverage in reliable sources is minimal and much below any notability guidelines. Fails WP:GNG easily. Source one does not mention the subject and is a government directory. Source two does not mention the subject. Source three seems to be a LinkedIn-type website that is neither independent nor reliable. Source four is the website of the subject's company. Source five is an interview. Source six is the website of the subject's company. Source seven is a mention on the website of a trade body the subject is a director of. Source eight does not mention the subject. Source nine does not mention the subject. Source ten does not mention the subject. Source eleven mentions he was one of 176 to receive a government certification/status card. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 10:12, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Bangladesh. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 10:12, 9 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination – the title was created as a draft and made into a redirect to Ananta Group, but the article has been restored over the redirect multiple times by the draft creator, so there's not a lot of alternatives to an AfD. I made the same source evaluation as Vinegarymass911 when I re-restored the redirect; three new sources have been added since then (nos 8, 9, and 10 in the current version), but as Vinegarymass911 observes above, none of them mentions Zahir. All I find in a WP:BEFORE search for sources are trivial mentions and affiliated sources. --bonadea contributions talk 10:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)


 * • Keep per nomination - More diversified information and sources are incorporated. Instead of giving a nomination to delete this page, we should consider the authenticity and add relevant sources. I just added many sources and relevant information based on his profile. Also, Harvard University did a report on him. His involvement with almost all the Bangladeshi Govt and private RMG institutions is remarkable.
 * I did a broad survey on him. All the mentioned sources proved his recognization. Unless this type of well-recognized person, who belongs WIKI page?
 * Requesting all except giving the nomination to delete please correct and input your relevant sources.@Bonadea@Vinegarymass911
 * Thanks for feedback. M.parvage (talk) 08:43, 10 May 2023 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: M.parvage (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.  — Note to closing admin: M.parvage (talk • contribs) appears to have a close connection with the subject of the article being discussed.


 * There is still no coverage at all of Zahir himself in independent, secondary sources. When you say Harvard University did a report on him, do you refer to the biographical text in the programme for the "Bangladesh Rising" conference? (Page 8 in this). That's not a report, and it is not secondary – that kind of text is submitted by the speaker, it's not written by the organisation that hosts the conference. --bonadea contributions talk 10:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The organization definitely checked about Sharif before publishing, as it is Harvard. Additionally, The CIP persons are the most facilitated by the Bangladesh government, and he was awarded several times and still, he is a CIP. it reflects his independency. M.parvage (talk) 11:56, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep @Vinegarymass911, As per your observations, I researched on Sharif Zahir, trying to find the authentic report. Then updated all the sources. You may check again. Hope everything is fine now, you can withdraw your claim. M.parvage (talk) 04:56, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Each participant in the discussion may only make one bolded "keep" or "delete" comment. I have struck your duplicate "keep" for you. Please be aware of the fact that none of the sources you have added show any notability whatsoever for Zahir, for the same reasons as before. In addition, you have still not addressed the conflict of interest question on your user talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 05:16, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bonadea: Thank you for letting me know about the duplicate comment. I apologize for the mistake and appreciate you striking it for me.
 * Regarding the sources I added, I believe they provide evidence of Sharif Zahir's notability based on the guidelines set out by Wikipedia. However, I understand that not everyone may agree with my assessment, and I respect that.
 * As for the conflict of interest question on my user talk page, I just addressed it and already taken the necessary steps to ensure that the article is neutral and unbiased. I believe that the content of the article should be judged on its own merits, rather than on any perceived conflicts of interest.
 * Thank you for your attention to these matters, and I look forward to continuing to contribute to the discussion in a constructive and respectful manner M.parvage (talk) 05:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete: The employees are sourcing keep votes on social media, I hope admins keeps a check on it and block keep votes account also. Anyways he fails notability, don’t delete it, burn it. 2409:40D4:101D:96B0:1121:7046:2FE2:A2FC (talk) 02:43, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you provide a link to said post?Vinegarymass911 (talk) 04:11, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Accusing people of manipulating the vote is a serious allegation, and it should be supported by evidence. In this case, it seems that there is no evidence to support the claim that employees are sourcing keep votes on social media. Therefore, I believe that this accusation is unfounded and should not be taken seriously.
 * I would also like to remind that Wikipedia's policies and guidelines clearly state that personal attacks, harassment, and disruptive behavior are not tolerated. (like the word burn it). These actions undermine the integrity of the platform and can have a negative impact on the community.
 * Also, if there are valid concerns about the notability of Sharif Zahir, these should be raised in a constructive and respectful manner. The goal of Wikipedia is to provide accurate and reliable information to its readers, and we should all work together to achieve this goal. M.parvage (talk) 04:27, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bonadea please don't do unnecessary things. Are you paid to do such things? There is no prove and the claim has no value as we as the user. Seems like an influential vote. As an experienced contributor you can struck such claims not bold. Thanks for understanding. M.parvage (talk) 16:02, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not paid to do anything on Wikipedia. The administrator who eventually closes the discussion will evaluate each !vote on its merits. An unsubstantiated claim that "keep" !votes are solicited elsewhere is not going to carry any weight, but there is no reason to strike the actual "delete" comment, and "burn it" is perhaps a childish thing to say but not a personal attack. Anyway, the only thing I did was fixing the formatting in the comment, to help other participants as well as the closing admin. Please stop bludgeoning the discussion. Thanks! --bonadea contributions talk 07:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Accroding to your (@Vinegarymass911) deletion submission on SHARIF ZAHIR, you pointed the article doesn't met the General Notability Criteria WP:GNG @Bonadea also raises voice to delete the article there. Then I do a broad survey on him to gather knowledge as it is my first creation in Wikipedia and found interesting and notable publications on him then updated the information from the sources.
 * Now the article on Sharif Zahir meets the general notability guideline of Wikipedia WP:GNG. The sources used in the article meet all criteria of notability and indicates this (Articles for deletion/Sharif Zahir) page is not require anymore.
 * 1. Presumed
 * The article is about a living person who is notable in their field. Sharif Zahir is a Bangladeshi businessman and the managing director of Ananta Group, one of the largest conglomerates in Bangladesh. He is also a former director of the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA).
 * 2. Significant coverage
 * The article has been cited by other reliable sources, including news articles, academic journals, and government websites. The article has also been discussed on social media and in online forums.
 * 3. Reliable
 * The sources used in the article are reliable and credible. They are from reputable news organizations, academic journals, and government websites.
 * 4. Sources should be secondary
 * The sources used in the article are secondary sources. This means that they are not original sources of information, but rather they are reports or analyses of primary sources.
 * 5. Independent of the subject
 * The sources used in the article are independent of the subject. This means that they are not written by the subject or by someone who is closely associated with the subject.
 * In conclusion, the article on Sharif Zahir meets the general notability guideline of Wikipedia. The sources used in the article meet all six criteria of notability.
 * Here are some specific examples of the sources used in the article and how they meet the criteria of notability:
 * The Daily Star is a reputable news organization in Bangladesh. It has published several articles about Sharif Zahir, including one that discusses his business acumen and another that profiles his family.
 * The Journal of Business Ethics is an academic journal that publishes articles on business ethics. It has published an article about Sharif Zahir's work on corporate social responsibility.
 * The Government of Bangladesh website has a page about Sharif Zahir that lists his accomplishments and awards.
 * These are just a few examples of the many sources that have been used to create the article on Sharif Zahir. These sources are reliable, credible, and independent, and they provide significant coverage of Sharif Zahir's work and accomplishments M.parvage (talk) 07:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Here's a quick source assessment.

--bonadea contributions talk 10:45, 15 May 2023 (UTC)


 * @Bonadea Some of your assessment is not right. Especially the Source 1 and 2. Definately others also. Please do not do things intentionally. Previously you also blamed my talk page Please be 100% sure before write or comment.
 * Below Assesment FYI
 * M.parvage (talk) 13:03, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I am rather busy with real-life things and won't be spending any more time on this, also because WP:BLUDGEON is a thing and I don't want to commit that. I would just like to point out that you are misinformed about press releases – they are by definition not independent. See this information. Also, if you stop to think about it you will very quickly realise that when there are four copies of the same text, they can't all contribute to notability per GNG (and if there are four copies of the same press release, none of them contributes). Above you claim that there was an article about Zahir in Journal of Business Ethics. That source does not appear to have been used in the Wikipedia article. Interestingly, when I do a full-text search for his name in the journal archives of J Bus Ethics at EBSCOhost which cover all issues from 1982 onwards, I get no hits. If you do add that source, please do your fellow editors the courtesy to provide the basic bibliographic info; in the case of a journal article that would include the title, author(s), year of publication, volume, issue, and pages. Please do not ping me again. Thanks! --bonadea contributions talk 14:12, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Everyone is busy with their own life but also some people contributing and some are pretending.
 * According to your reply I removed the PR and there is only the Government website to good enough to present him as a CIP. But unfortunately you missed his name in those lists.
 * Thanks for understanding. M.parvage (talk) 16:08, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bonadea, You have the patience of a saint. They are clearly misrepresenting sources and making ridiculous claims in a desperate attempt to preserve this article. I am refusing to engage with them; no point. Cheers, and happy editing.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 16:05, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @Bonadea, You have the patience of a saint. They are clearly misrepresenting sources and making ridiculous claims in a desperate attempt to preserve this article. I am refusing to engage with them; no point. Cheers, and happy editing.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 16:05, 15 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom & per User:Bonadea. --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 19:42, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * While User:Bonadea 's assesment was injustice and I already proved that, as example- Source 2, the major source of CIP from the Govt Website. So aggreeing with this user doesn't make sense. Please give your own feedback with appropriate reason.@আফতাবুজ্জামান M.parvage (talk) 08:39, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Take a moment to click on the blue-linked text "Significant coverage?" in the source assessment tables. You'll see why none of the sources that mention Sharif Zahir meets that requirement. That includes the lists linked from source 2 (as mentioned above, you have a responsibility to Wikipedia's readers and your fellow editors to provide information in the citations about what the source is – I could add that the onus is also on you to provide as specific a source as possible, and not leave it to the reader to guess that they have to click one of a dozen links on a fairly uninformative web page to find the info.) --bonadea contributions talk 13:01, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * well@Bonadea, At the below of the article, It is clearly mentioned that he awarded numerous times. And all his name is mentioned in all the CIP list expect one. So it doesn't mention all the link of sources. And if it is you can contribute to improve. Not only deletion is necessary. And another point is source 2, The article is fully against Sharif Zahir and it was an investigation report. So what do you think about it? Is it promotional? M.parvage (talk) 06:39, 17 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per Bonadea's incredibly comprehensive source analysis. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 16:41, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @BubbaJoe123456, Your mentioned person is still unable to prove his analysis is right. If you are ok with him then I would like to rely my this ques on behalf of him. And remember that, he blamed me without any reason. And it proves that he is doing things intentionally. Better to do your own. M.parvage (talk) 06:52, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Honest feedback:
 * 1. Looking at the table you assembled, you really need to read up on wikipedia standards for what constitutes a reliable source, and what constitutes evidence of notability.
 * 2. Responding to every single vote here, and your passion on this topic, creates the impression that you have some sort of conflict of interest in regards to the subject of this article. I'm assuming good faith, and taking you at your word that you don't have any sort of conflict, but the way you're acting is going to remind experienced editors of the behavior of COI editors. In short, it's not helping. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 14:55, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and source eval by Bonadea.  // Timothy :: talk  16:53, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Of the 20 sources, 7 are independent (shomoyeralo.com, epb.gov.bd, The Daily Star [x3], BEZA, and Dhaka Tribune). The others are press releases, interviews, or capsule bios supplied by Zahir. Of the 7 independent sources, shomoyeralo.com has no reputation for accuracy and fact checking. Of the 6 independent and reliable sources, only 2 mention Sharif. Each contains a single sentence about him, with one adding a quote from him. One or more deeper links on epb.gov.bd may mention Zahir, but they're all in the form of directory listings. In short, there is no significant coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources. CIP is not a well-known and significant award or honor that would meet WP:ANYBIO. It is revealing that, although denying any conflict of interest, has studiously avoided mentioning the widely reported allegations of money laundering. If Zahir were notable, those allegations would belong in any Wikipedia biography of him. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:56, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:BIO.   scope_creep Talk  21:18, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:12, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. I've evaluated both source assessment tables. While the table by appears to be a compilation of basic errors (such as erroneously claiming that Clearly mentioned Sharif Zahir's Name is an adequate justification for WP:SIGCOV), 's table looks to be entirely correct. I'm not able to find other sources online that significantly cover this person and are independent of him, so I believe deletion is appropriate under WP:DEL-REASON#8. —  Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 15:49, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete per above. CastJared (talk) 17:38, 20 May 2023 (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.