Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raakin Iqbal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. - Mailer Diablo 04:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Raakin Iqbal

Raakin Iqbal (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

Notability in question. Possibly fails WP:BIO, also WP:COI. ghits: [1]. Washington Post article does not state that he's a mogul, it states he's a "mogul in the making" and "up-and-coming mogul." NMChico24 02:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. WP:COI issues. Possible userfy here. --Dennisthe2 02:29, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep COI issues can be addressed in a future AfD. But whatever we think of self-promotion, the fact is sometimes it works. It is possible to promote oneself enough to get noticed -- and this guy seems to have done it. There's enough coverage to meet WP:BIO and WP:V. He's managed to get independent publications to mouth his alliterative slogans. Don't know how he did it, but there they are, sourced. So they're entitled to be in the article. Fair is fair. --Shirahadasha 02:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep Shirahadasha makes some good points. This guy is in a Washington Post article, after all. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 03:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete What we have here is a person who is good at promoting them self (thats why he created his own Wikipedia page). This does not make him notable, at best we have two sources for the article, but this really isn't multiple non verifiable sources as stipulated by WP:NOTE. The Washington post article comes close but it to has a hint of self promotion, who does he know at the Washington Post (which for some reason seems to be a source in a lot of AFD debates). The YouTube video is an interview and in my mind should not be used as a biographical source as it may violate WP:AUTO. What exactly has Mr. Iqbal done that makes him notable? Nothing, starting your own company does not make you notable, even if the Washington Post reports on it. Self promotion does not equal notability --Daniel J. Leivick 03:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Agree with DJL. What has he done to make him notable? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CrashingWave (talk • contribs) 03:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC).
  • Delete - Yeah, the guy has an article about him in the Washington Post, so what? That's one source, the guy isn't notable, it's nearly completely unsourced, and half the links are to YouTube. --Wooty Woot? contribs 05:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, fails WP:BIO at present. Maybe next year. Shirahadasha sees COI exactly the opposite as I do; I don't see COI as a reason in itself to delete an article, but when notability is iffy, COI is generally the tipping point for me. Get your undisputed notability the usual way, and don't game Wikipedia to get there. --Dhartung | Talk 07:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Per above, this fails WP:BIO]. Having a single article doesn't make someone notable enough. Somitho 10:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete WP:BIO, WP:COI. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Weak delete, something notable there, yet WP:COI makes me tip to delete, then again... someone could fix this by end of this AfD Alf photoman 14:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete I totally agree with Dhartung regarding the relationship between WP:COI and WP:N. JCO312 15:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Leaning very slightly towards delete - anyone who gets a feature in the Washington Post is nudging on the cusp of notability. I'd prefer another good source, though, and the COI issues are touchy. If it's fixed, and if another source comes up, I'd reconsider. Tony Fox (arf!) 21:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per Dhartung. Montco 04:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Anyone who followed my votes a few years back or my recent run knows I hate to delete, but Wikipedia should not be used to boost his notability. —siroχo 08:49, 24 January 2007 (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.