Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Ghouse

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:43, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Ghouse

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Many things are asserted, but I think none of them amount to notability. None of the awards are significant; almost all of the sources are promotional. The article was written mostly or entirely by a known paid sock-puppetting editor.

The inclusion in the lede and infobox of claimed notability in a large number of occupations including the rather ill-defined one of professional speaker is in my experience an almost sure sign of promotionalism. The further content is essentially what he chooses to say about himself and his interests. None of this belongs in an encyclopedia.

I think the combination of borderline notability and promotionalism makes a case for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 00:49, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the reasons User:DGG details. I actually thought I had nominated this already. Thargor Orlando (talk) 13:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep According to this article,[1] Mike Ghouse had been under consideration by the Obama administration for appointment as special envoy to the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) a major honor. He didn't get the post. I know about INHERIT the point being this is on first glance not a huckster preacher. As for sources Ghouse has been often quoted in the Indian press.[2] He has made many appearances in mainstream media (one example from Fox News and others) as an expert guest on religious pluralism. I agree the article is puffed up by a professional PR firm and should be torn down and rebuilt using reliable sources available. Like sources available at the Washington Post. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 20:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per DGG , WP:TNT , WP:ADVERT and WP:SPIP. This article is clearly a paid advertisement and promotion for his work with the biography acting as nothing but a WP:COATRACK. Most of the content appears to come straight from his CV.The Subject generates WP:Ghits and this includes the mainstream media but that does not the subject notable by default .The article needs to be torn down.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:51, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and WP:COATRACK. Logical Cowboy (talk) 00:40, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Should anybody find stronger sources, WP:TNT is still the best way forward. bobrayner (talk) 22:30, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.