Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Mohsin Nawab Rizvi

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 no consensus. Closed with no prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) Mz7 (talk) 02:32, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Mohsin Nawab Rizvi

Syed Mohsin Nawab Rizvi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Basically original research with a questionable source (islamic-laws.com), blogspot and various Wikipedia links including a userpage. My searches (both this name and the "popular known" one) found absolutely nothing good aside from this which seems to be for someone else. Granted, if there are any good sources, they're non-English and offline and even a search with the Arabic name found nothing so with all that said, I'm not seeing a possibility of improvement and convincement of keeping; having a final look at the history, I noticed Faizhaider improved it (and I would ping him but it seems he's not very active) but aside from that, there hasn't been anything else. SwisterTwister talk 05:09, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep on the basis of the problems caused by cultural bias. I have no real way of judging the importance, but the presumption is that the author of multiple boos and Principal of a College is notable. The evidence though weak is sufficient if there is no contrary material. Iwould take a much more positive approach to this and similar articles if I could read the necessary languages, or even if it were feasible to use the various search engines and machine translators, but they do not work in this area.

There are two approaches that seem possible: one is to insist on roughly the same evidence that we would for English or American people, and defer the rest until we have sufficient qualified people to write the articles properly. The other is to accept notability that would seem to be similar to that which we accept from the areas we know better. At present, I'm willing to do this, except for BLPs. DGG ( talk ) 03:31, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:38, 26 August 2015 (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.