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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zakir Naik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Unnotable person. Fails WP:BIO, at first glance he appears to be notable, but its just a list of his beliefs. As someone noted on my talk, "He's not any better known than other Islamic public speakers, it's just that the article has been the scene of frantic revert wars between those who find him hilarious". [1] Arbusto 23:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As per nom. Tarret 01:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep 132,000 Ghits seems quite prolific and well-known Raffles mk 03:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep From the Google results as well as the fact that he has his own set of notable critics, Zakir Naik appears notable enough to have his own Wikipedia article. -- tariqabjotu 03:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Meets my idea of notable due to the number of Google hits and some of the text I read on some of those pages. Better references are needed, though. The links in the "Critics" section lead to either forum messages or articles that don't talk about Zakir Naik at all. Those links alone wouldn't convince me that he has any notable critics. SWAdair 04:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, meets WP:BIO criteria, number of Google hits makes him notable, sources need to be cited though. We should use reliable sources for the article as SWAdair pointed out. Article needs some cleanup though. --Terence Ong _{(T | C)} 06:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The very idea of "reliable" source becomes controversial in cases like this one, however the guy appears well-known in Islamic circles, as well as being widely criticised. Stammer 07:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep He's not very well known in the West, but he seems to have a following in India. If we keep articles on people like Maurice Bucaille and Ahmed Deedat -- who are preaching the same message about the rationality of Islam -- then we need to keep this one. But it IS an accident that he got more attention than the other fellows. Send the mockers to the other articles, that will expand them handily. Zora 08:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep He's very well known in South Asia and Muslim communities abroad. BhaiSaab ^talk 12:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletions. -- BhaiSaab ^talk 12:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep This dude just barely makes it across the notability threshhold for me. My biggest problem with the article is that it needs to be cleaned up for POV (in both directions-- pro and anti) and the lengthiness of it is unjustified. There's no reason to have such a long list of his beliefs. Let's prune this thing down, please. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. OfficeGirl 18:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but with a complete revision. He is a very notable, if not the most notable, South-Asian public speaker on Islam. Admittedly the articles is amongst the poorest I've come across on wikipedia- Sources on both sides are dubious to say the least! I still don't see how some random guy on some forum qualifies as a "critic" in the encyclopedic sense...--khello 23:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep He is notable in some world regions(for example in Indonesia where I live in) --Nielswik_(talk) 15:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep - What! This is a bigger joke than putting the Bilal Philips up for deletion. I'm not even going to bother with giving reasons for notability this time as it's self evident from reading the article. Wikipidian 03:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep - Must keep, he is very famous among Muslims in the UK.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.255.83.10 (talk • contribs) .
• Keep - Naik is a household name in millions of Muslim homes. There are millions of people who admire him as one of the greatest preachers on earth. Would you delete the entry for, say, Billy Graham ?
• The problem with unreliable sources stems from the fact that few mainstream, high-brow scholars have dealt with Naik. So, the material on him mostly comes from web forums, sites and blogs etc. I agree however that it's absurd simply to list his beliefs. The article should be pruned.Not that the Bucaille article is much different.giordaanoGiordaano 23:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above commenters. Yamaguchi先生 05:58, 9 November 2006
• Strong keep - Must keep, he is very famos everywhere. And he is really doing very good and really great things not only for Muslims but for the humanity.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 41.209.122.53 (talk • contribs) .
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. Bakaman _Bakatalk 19:47, 10 November 2006 (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.