Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zaman Ali


 * 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 speedy delete. I have also asked that it be salted, given the rather long history of re-creation and re-deletion, as well as the blocked user issue. (non-admin closure) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:50, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Zaman Ali

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Was deprodded without rationale or improvement. No indication of notability. A Scholar search did not turn up anything to show he passes WP:NSCHOLAR, and not nearly enough to pass WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:15, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 14:18, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 14:18, 9 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - looks like an advertisement for his book, which looks to be self-published. Smmurphy(Talk) 14:36, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

But Zaman Ali page is all true and there is nothing incorrect in it.Alvin Erich (talk) 16:16, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Give time soner there will be plenty of sources will be added.Alvin Erich (talk) 16:16, 9 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvin Erich (talk • contribs) 15:54, 9 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Nothing more than a puff-piece for a new self-published book. Not a notable author, not a notable academic. Yunshui 雲 水 16:25, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: A WP:SPA article on someone purporting to have written "one of the best book in Philosophy", sourced to his shiny new Goodreads page where he repeats the claim. Not big on humility, it appears. No evidence that anyone else has noticed. Fails WP:AUTHOR, WP:ACADEMIC, WP:BASIC. The claim is absurd and unsubstantiated and the page is effectively promotional, so I am also flagging for CSD A7/G11. AllyD (talk) 16:40, 9 March 2017 (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.