Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Noor Zaman Naqshbandi Shazli


 * 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. L Faraone  02:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Syed Noor Zaman Naqshbandi Shazli

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable person. Claim of "Chief Saint of the Supreme Order of Naqshbandi Shadhili" must be taken with a grain of salt as No other claims of notability can be verified either. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:25, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) This Wikipedia article is the only mention of such a group to be found on the web;
 * 2) The citation for this fact is to an apparently non-existent book.  (The ISBN can not be found in any of the major book search tools, and the publisher's website  does not list any book with the word Deoband in the title.)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — Mike  moral  ♪♫  20:32, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Mike  moral  ♪♫  20:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. — Mike  moral  ♪♫  20:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:VSCA. Highly dubious claims not backed up by reliable sources. How did this get beyond the quick-fail criteria? Pol430   talk to me  18:45, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Biography of a living person. highly heroic tone and no source except his own website. This is never worth to be an article in wikipedia. Wasif (talk) 06:16, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Notability in the English-speaking world not established, at least by the single source quoted. Highly promotional tone unbecoming an encyclopaedia. Might consider keep but only after substantial copyedit as it's likely that the person would pass notability on urwiki.  kashmiri TALK  00:17, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Commment The criteria for notability on en-wiki are not solely dependent on English-language sources. Although those are preferred, they are not required.  If there are Urdu language sources available (and if they are reliable), please let us know so they can be evaluated.  (Google translate doesn't do super well with Urdu, but we might be able to hobble through the translation to at least establish its independence and significance.)  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 10:56, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep & Improve: This Saint's article need some references and citations, which can be added. There are Urdu Books in which he has been mentioned by other Prominent Scholars. The tone of this article is NOT heroic. He is an Modern-age and upcoming Sufi Saint. As more references come-by, we will be adding it. So, Please Keep & DO NOT DELETE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faizanhb2 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment You are confusing an encyclopaedia with your prayer book (and that's evident throughout your writing of this article). This project is not to proclaim anyone a "saint", "modern-age", "upcoming", etc. Please be very much to the point. What are the books you are referring to that establish Mr Zaman's WP:NOTABILITY? Are they independent sources that fall within the Wikipedia definition of WP:RELIABLE SOURCES? But foremostly, please state that you are not affiliated with Mr Zaman so that there is no doubt you might have a WP:CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Thanks.  kashmiri TALK  21:13, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply to Comment All the sources and references used in the article are independent and meets WP:RELIABLE SOURCES. Let me be CLEAR, There is NO WP:CONFLICT OF INTEREST. This article was written in good faith and independent of any influence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faizanhb2 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a Good Article Just need to update some citations and some sentences need to be rewritten. Another great Naqshbandi Sufi. I wound recommend to keep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JackLuna (talk • contribs) 21:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * KEEP Article There is no need to delete this article. All the claims made here are referenced with Authentic books. I have personally seen him on several TV Shows. The recordings can be watched on youtube. Might need some external links. But, Overall a perfect article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tasbih25 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 30 June 2013 (UTC)  — Tasbih25 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep This article is about a great Sufi. Has reliable references. Other Islamic Scholars have cited him in their books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noori313 (talk • contribs) 22:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)  — Noori313 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep: After a through review of this article. I say we should Keep this Article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salman313 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 30 June 2013 (UTC)  — Salman313 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: the last 5 !votes or so are obviously all the same editor; an SPI has been opened, and once checked, any excessive comments by the same individual will be struck. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:26, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete: No notability evident after a few research. Fai  zan  12:38, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I just made a few edits so that at least the language looks better. One more reference was found fake (i.e., the guy's name does not have a single mention in the quoted book), now the article is completely unsourced. Doubts about the guy's notability remain, en-Google shows nothing important except a few YouTube videos purportedly from a Pakistani TV programme and the guy's homepage. Seems like one of thousands of local preachers or "holy men" so common across South Asia. kashmiri TALK  19:31, 2 July 2013 (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.