Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharifuddin Khalifa
Source: 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. Courcelles 23:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sharifuddin Khalifa
- Sharifuddin Khalifa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Only has 2 references one saying the other is a hoax, a Google search only reveals biased or unreliable sources. May be a hoax. Was restored as a contested PROD. - McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 17:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The kid may be a faker promoted by the people around him, as one of the references claims, or he may be a prodigy according to the hard-to-believe claims in the only Reliable Source provided, "Scotland on Sunday". From Wikipedia's standpoint it doesn't matter. What does matter is that he is not notable. There are absolutely no Reliable Sources found about him at Google or Google News, with the sole exception of the article from Scotland on Sunday. If he really has been touring the world and converting thousands, as claimed, then there should be sources documenting his appearances, and his article should stay here regardless of whether we believe him to be a miracle or a fraud. Since such sources have not been found, the article should be deleted as non-notable. --MelanieN (talk) 22:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Agree with MelanieN... whether he is legitimate or a fraud, there does not appear to enough coverage in WP:RS to substantiate either side of that coin and write an encyclopedic article about him. Ultimately non-notable. --Kinu t/c 18:02, 26 September 2010 (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.