Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Professor Abdul Hakeem

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 of the debate was no consensus; keep. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 12:06, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Professor Abdul Hakeem

Delete.This individual fails to meet the criteria listed in WP:PROFTEST. Please see the deletion discussion of the article for Shah Mahmoud Hanifi for an example of how articles about professors should be cited in order to prove notability.[1] I have placed a deletion warning on the creator's talk page. Strothra 13:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination, unless additional evidence of notability, influence in his field is provided. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. A Pakistani academic with 2500 Google hits under his romanized name, with no one here knows how many under a native language search, can safely be said to presumptively meet notability requirements. Nominations like this are bad practice, and the resulting deletions damage the Wikipedia project. We have gotten to a cultural state where "Gee, I never heard of this" seems to be a good enough excuse to nominate something for deletion, RATHER THAN raising legitimate issues on the talk page first to see if anyone can help improve the article. In this case, the nominator should have said "Gee, I never heard of this professor, and I looked in Google and found only n listings for him, so I wonder if there's a problem here. Then, pop a note on the talk page. "Hey everybody, I don't know much about Pakistan, but I never heard of this guy and had trouble verifying the information. It's probably my own lack of searching skills, so I wonder if anyone can help me out here. Is this article as good as it could be?" The problem is particular acute with regard to non-Western subjects, particularly when new, non-Western users are involved who are reporting information regarded as common knowledge in their own communities. Monicasdude 15:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment. Just for future reference, I am a student of Middle Eastern and South Asian history & politics. You also do not know my personal background so please do not attempt to judge it. Please remember WP:CIVIL and WP:FAITH; it seems that you have a serious problem following these policies but they are not just good policy, they are decent practice as a human being. Further, I nominated the article based on its merits as a Wikipedia article not based on the assumption that users will see an inadequate article on Wikipedia and go to google then search for the individual. I nominated the article because it clearly does not meet the standards set forth by the Wikipedia servers in which it is located. I have notified the user of the AfD and that user has the ability to update the article according to Wikipedia standards by the time this discussion closes. I am sure that users voting would be more than willing to change their vote if the appropriate updates are made to the article. --Strothra 21:35, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. I had a hard time replicating the 2500 hits, but it does look like one that should go through talk first. Jonas Silk 17:04, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion Jonas. I feel that the user has an appropriate amount of time to update the article before discussion on the AfD closes but I will keep this in mind from now on. Please note, however, that you are voting to keep an article which does not stand up to Wikipedia's standards and are basing it on responses to Google searches. --Strothra 21:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nominator ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 18:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep subject to verifiable expansion. -- SockpuppetSamuelson
• Delete can't find much on google that is actually about this person and their notability is not sufficiently asserted or supported MLA 08:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I object to such short articles, but this is clearly notable enough to keep even as a two sentence stub. JeffBurdges 13:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Stubs are creations which must have expandability. His notability, if any, certainly does not exist in the quantity which would enable this stub to be epanded. It's not even worth as a stub.--Strothra 15:13, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete please delete this article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ICheetah (talk • contribs).

It's good practice to state a reason for deletion. Might I be so bold as to inquire? Sandstein 20:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Well he was the creator of the article. --Strothra 20:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

He did not create this article, i created this a while ago without knowing that other people and places have the same name Abdul Hakeem. The main article was made a disamb page and the article about this person moved here by ICheetah.

• Delete for lack of WP:RS alone, Google does not immediately establish notability. The burden of proof for notability and verification is on the author. Sandstein 20:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
• KEEP, this person is not just a professor, but a very important and influencial shia scholar in Pakistan. He has influence over a large number of Shi'ites and is known very well in pakistan for stopping Shia retaliation against sectarian attacks.--Khalid 18:18, 14 April 2006 (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.