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. kelapstick^(bainuu) 20:45, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Shanawar (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)

Non-notable person. Musa Talk  23:29, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk  23:30, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk  23:30, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk  23:31, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Fails WP:GNG's significant coverage in reliable sources. Nothing on GNews, no mentions in GBooks. I've checked the refs in the article and none even mention the guy. The sourcing is pretty much a WP:COATRACK about his father Nadeem Sarwar. - HyperGaruda (talk) 07:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion is opposed: Notability is beyond proof if one can read the local news in Pakistan. I have also read the comments of someone on the talk page. Editors pointed out the attention and involvement of concerned community before a neutral action. For your info and knowledge your are invited to watch shia islam portal and its section "in the news" he was accompanied with his father in the British Parliament for mourning sitting. Nannadeem (talk) 15:25, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nannadeem: I've taken a look at Portal:Shia Islam/News, but neither Facebook nor Twitter are reliable sources, because the content is self-published without editorial supervision. You'll really need more reliable sources about Ali Shanawar to support that he (not his father!) is notable for the (worldwide) Wikipedia community, i.e. beyond his local fanbase. And don't just say that there are sources; you will have to provide the sources here on Wikipedia. - HyperGaruda (talk) 17:07, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what Noha? Have you read the names of Noha reciters? Have not you noticed that his father's page has already been deleted? Do you have knowledge about this genre and the community likes it. Applying bureaucracy of rules is not the very basis of WP. Please read Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. You must respect the sentiments of a community. The action should be based on comments from concerned community.

Notability: type his name in the google search engine you will see above hundred results - legible in English. Nannadeem (talk) 18:53, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Nannadeem: I'm a Shia Muslim and I don't think this article meets Notibility. He is just popular among Shia Muslims and a few Sunni Muslims. There are no reliable source which shows that he is notable. And some of the content in the article is copied from his website. www.Safeer-E-Aza.com.--Musa Talk  22:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your disclosure for your belonging to Shia community and your tag for deletion of page on account of notability of "Ali Shanawar" is a question on your knowledge. Instead of improving the page, you have tagged it for deletion. This is a conflict between some schools of this community and most of them are known as "orthodox".

WP has recently launched a campaign of WP:WAMP for more representation from Asian countries. Deletion of pages is cause of set back to the campaign. The page has no harmful content to our WP. You will notice that many a websites have cited the WP as their source, so we should pride of our WP which is also serving as source for info in respect of Ali Shanawar. Any how, I request you to improve the page as a friend to me and your own community. Thanks Nannadeem (talk) 15:16, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to improve this article but I found nothing about him so I nominated it for deletion. He is not a notable person. You're trying to save this article because you're fan of Ali Shanawar. I also listen to his Noha's but I don't find him notable.--Musa Talk  18:40, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are issuing two contradictory statements simultaneously: (1)He is just popular among Shia Muslims and a few Sunni Muslims + (2) He is not a notable person.

Your childish finding of my being a fan of him is denied. You were unable to improve the page thus you decided to tag it for deletion. This is biased action you have done. Thus deletion proposal appears personal and not for goodwill of EN:WP. Nannadeem (talk) 19:24, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I request the deletion admin to close the discussion. The concerned community has already been suffering from due representation. Nannadeem (talk) 19:24, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:Subjective importance and specifically the subsections WP:POPULARITY, WP:FAME and WP:POSITION. Here on Wikipedia, notability is not the same as popularity. By notability we mean that there is significant coverage in reliable and independent sources, in order to prevent fabrications from being formed here. In other words: a short mention somewhere in a news article's margin is not significant; a forum or blog where anyone can post anything, without people correcting your mistakes, is not reliable; Ali's personal website and facebook page are not independent nor reliable, since he could easily write that he's won 5 Grammy Awards, while we all know that is not true. Without reliable sources, an article is not improvable and thus should be deleted. Again, provide reliable sources that have enough to say about Ali if this page should not be deleted. - HyperGaruda (talk) 20:18, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, That is what I was trying to say.--Musa Talk  20:39, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Nadeem Sarwar

With ref to finding of notability of son and father cited by the page deletion proposer: (and) In order to avoid the flag of OR I am taking liberty of reproducing contents from the feature article published in the Sunday Magazine of the Express Tribune (partner of New York Times) for popularity and notability^[1]:

Not only is Nadeem Sarwar the king of the noha/marsia industry, he is also the most successful artist of the larger music industry as he sells 200,000-300,000 CDs a year and all of them get sold within the span of two days. This is despite the presence of YouTube and downloadable music; no artists has a better business plan or a more loyal fan following,” says Imran (a business man from Rainbow Centre, Karachi)

I further add that while searching info about the persons in question, most of the URLs open the pages for download of Nohas. This is a technical reason as well. Nannadeem (talk) 12:41, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadeem Sarwar (Noha Khwan) and this is the discussion for deletion of article of Ali Shanawar not his father.--Musa Talk  17:51, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I've removed the header as it had messed up the AFD log. –Davey2010^Talk 18:53, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know. I am sure you have chosen a community and genre that is why you have also placed deletion tag at Rehan Azmi. Nannadeem (talk) 19:10, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - the lone keep !vote makes no persuasive argument, and has presented zero new sources. Searches turned up virtually nothing on this individual. Granted they were in English, so I have to defer to HyperGaruda and Musa Razas assessment of the foreign sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:29, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge He is famous Noha reciter, so is better that merge to Noha article. There are not sufficient reliable sources. Saff V. (talk) 13:21, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I see above that comments for keeping are based on WP:Ignore all rules and "respecting the wishes of a community", which I find quite concerning. Not notable is not notable, and an article about someone not notable should be deleted. LjL (talk) 15:02, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The nominator said it all: this isn't a notable person. The article's citation method is clearly a grasp for straws as many of the citations simply don't support the cited material, as has already been noted by other editors. The only clear source we have is the one from Amazon, which isn't RS. The subject fails the WP:GNG once we look past the improper citation and since that's sort of a threshold, there isn't much else to be said. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:54, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments: Yes not notable is not notable. This is my stance too, but try to understand that who is here to represent the subject or a particular genre, that is why I am pleading. Please see at WP:NTEMP where it is clear that once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage. The page is not new. Just before relisting it has been accepted by the page deletion proposer that he is popular among Shia and Sunni. It is my simple wording that rule of law is for justice/equilibrium - and not for only punishment or reward. Nannadeem (talk) 16:00, 15 December 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.