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) 22:05, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jamillah A. Shabazz (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)

In my opinion, the sources provided in this article do not reach the level established in the notability criteria. The creator removed my {prod} tag, indicating that she disagrees and a community discussion is called for. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:41, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Channeling spirits will not establish notability. I haven't found any third-party sources and, honestly, the article would need a rewrite as it suffers from POV issues. SwisterTwister talk 22:49, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Channeling a spirit is extremely notable; yet, also extremely unfalsifiable. No legitimate references, either. LogicalCreator (talk) 07:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - No coverage in reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 13:42, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete--No WP:RS. Utterly fails WP:AUTHOR and WP:BK. Qworty (talk) 05:47, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as failing to have in depth coverage in reliable independent sources. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:02, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete likely self-promotion. Gigs (talk) 06:09, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete likely self-promotion. --Musamies (talk) 06:20, 28 October 2012 (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.