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. Consensus is that sourcing is insufficient. Star Mississippi 00:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Ali Muhammad Shibli

Ali Muhammad Shibli (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Deleted earlier this year after an AfD that attracted no participation. Then restored without improvement. The articles in other languages wikis aren’t much help in determining notability or providing sources. I’ve looked in English and Bengali and don’t see anything that looks like in depth coverage in RIS. There may of course be sources in Bengali I’ve missed, but if so it would be good for someone to add them. Mccapra ( talk) 19:45, 19 September 2022 (UTC) reply

The argument for deletion is that notability is not demonstrated by the current sources and no others have been found. Mccapra ( talk) 03:17, 25 September 2022 (UTC) reply
except that you give no evidence of having actually reviewed the current (offline) source. Jahaza ( talk) 03:19, 25 September 2022 (UTC) reply
No, I haven’t, but that would not be sufficient to demonstrate notability. Mccapra ( talk) 03:46, 25 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Just because you say so? It appears to be a standard biographical dictionary in Bengali. It's used as a source in dozens of Wikipedia articles. Generally, being listed in a national biographical dictionary is good evidence of notability. Jahaza ( talk) 05:32, 25 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Sure, it's presumably acceptable for use. But there's a big difference between "acceptable for use as one source amid a mix of solid WP:GNG-worthy sources" and "able to singlehandedly clinch the notability of a person all by itself even if no other acceptable sources are present at all". You have to prove the latter, not the former. Bearcat ( talk) 14:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 26 September 2022 (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.
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. Consensus is that sourcing is insufficient. Star Mississippi 00:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Ali Muhammad Shibli

Ali Muhammad Shibli (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Deleted earlier this year after an AfD that attracted no participation. Then restored without improvement. The articles in other languages wikis aren’t much help in determining notability or providing sources. I’ve looked in English and Bengali and don’t see anything that looks like in depth coverage in RIS. There may of course be sources in Bengali I’ve missed, but if so it would be good for someone to add them. Mccapra ( talk) 19:45, 19 September 2022 (UTC) reply

The argument for deletion is that notability is not demonstrated by the current sources and no others have been found. Mccapra ( talk) 03:17, 25 September 2022 (UTC) reply
except that you give no evidence of having actually reviewed the current (offline) source. Jahaza ( talk) 03:19, 25 September 2022 (UTC) reply
No, I haven’t, but that would not be sufficient to demonstrate notability. Mccapra ( talk) 03:46, 25 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Just because you say so? It appears to be a standard biographical dictionary in Bengali. It's used as a source in dozens of Wikipedia articles. Generally, being listed in a national biographical dictionary is good evidence of notability. Jahaza ( talk) 05:32, 25 September 2022 (UTC) reply
Sure, it's presumably acceptable for use. But there's a big difference between "acceptable for use as one source amid a mix of solid WP:GNG-worthy sources" and "able to singlehandedly clinch the notability of a person all by itself even if no other acceptable sources are present at all". You have to prove the latter, not the former. Bearcat ( talk) 14:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 26 September 2022 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook