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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Baba Deen Mohammad Shaikh

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable person. All of the sources are non-neutral WP:SPS and fail WP:RS. This is most likely a misinformation spread by Islamic missionaries since this subject has failed to received significant coverage outside the particular WP:EXCEPTIONAL claim that he converted thousands of people to Islam. GenuineArt (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence from independent sources. Staszek Lem (talk) 15:47, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. One of the sources couldn't say it better: "Such are Deen Muhammad Sheikh’s powers of persuasion that he led 108,000 people to the light of Islam since 1989." His powers of persuasion are so good he was able to fool all of these "sources". In the 30-31 years since 1989, there have been ~11k days. Apparently he was able to convert 10 people, in one day only each??? These claims are bogus, the article has to go. Unknown-Tree (talk) 16:06, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG and indeed it may also fail WP:NHOAX. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 06:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete extraordinary claims require extraordinary sourcing. Coverting over 100,000 is not supported without good sourcing.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2020 (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.