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. Moreschi (talk) (debate) 21:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

There is no indication of WP:ORG notability for this organization. In fact, the cited sources within the article do nothing more than refer to it by name. Furthermore, the bulk of the article is devoted to a screed against a rival organization. The admitted "Press & Information Secretary" of Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam and "office bearer" of Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam have been the main authors of this article and taken over Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi as well. I originally placed a small section on the ASI at the bottom of the Shahi article, but the members of this organization found it unsatisfactory for their apparent promotional needs, dutifully ignoring my many explantations of WP:COI, WP:N, WP:NPOV, etc. This article should be deleted. A redirect to Shahi would seem appropriate, and perhaps even a small merge of material, but the current work is a sham of an encyclopedia article. — Scientizzle 22:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. —— Scientizzle 22:52, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment If kept, this would need considerable trimming for unsourced statements (which would leave this a stub), and rewriting for POV (which may be difficult since the group seems almost unheard-of by non-followers, and poorly documented). This seems to be a real organization, but even the second-party sources used in this article seem to have little to go by.

  As appears from its name, the Anjuman-e Sarfaroshan-e Islam presents itself as somewhat closer to mainline Islam...
  —Weekly DurDesh article linked from References

  Interestingly, no Google news hits. Nothing links to their home page. / edg ☺ ☭ 00:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Rather deleting I would appreciate, if you kindly help me to improve this article, as I have worked a lot on this article and nine references have also been furnished to meet the Wikipedia's guideline, still if you think that Its not upto the mark, I be would glad it you kindly point out the weak point instead of deleting this article. --iamsaa 08:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the merger or deletion would be an approriate decision, I would rather suggest to stub this.--Falconkhe (talk) 10:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Falconkhe (talk · contribs) is another apparent Shahi devotee, currently adding Category:Gohar Shahi to everything in sight... — Scientizzle 15:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong, I am not a follower of Shahi, however, I have created Category:Gohar Shahi to place all related articles in a category, and this is not a new thing, you can see Category:Meher Baba, and so many other categories like this.--Falconkhe (talk) 05:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi. Organisation does not appear to meet notability criteria itself as per lack of non-trivial coverage from reliable sources, hence a seperate article doesn't seem warranted. ITAQALLAH 18:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• I strongly oppose to redirect to Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi, I am unable to understand, when it has been given nine references, instead of that you are doubtful about its notability? Alternatively, you may either STUB or DELETE but please don’t MERGE this to Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi.--Asikhi (talk) 05:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The nine references don't discuss the organization in any meaningful way--you cannot base an article on them. Why do you oppose a merge; I don't understand that. — Scientizzle 14:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jonny-mt 04:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• • Keep Because this organization does exist and it proves by this article as well, apart from that the references provided to this article clearly indicate that it is notable organization. However, any statement or sentences in this article, which you think are not balanced, can be removed.--iamsaa 05:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamsaa (talk • contribs)
• Comment. Not sure how relevant this is but User:Iamsaa on en.Wikibooks asked this question on 7 August 2007 indicating he was "press & information secretary of International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam" (the book he was referring to was published on en.Wikisource by someone with a different user name someone called User:Asikhi on en.WikiSource, in February 2008 after being deleted from en.Wikibooks 4 times). The creator of this International_Spiritual_Movement_Anjuman_Serfaroshan-e-Islam article being discussed here and 26 times editor of that article is a user also called User:Iamsaa, this time on en.Wikipedia. If Iamsaa on en.Wikipedia is the same person as Iamsaa in en.Wikibooks, then the press secratary is editing his own organization's article and there must be a conflict of interest. Note that on Wikipedia Iamsaa has stated he is an "office bearer of Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam" and "authorized representative of His Holiness Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi" [1]. Ha! (talk) 06:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply Let me tell you a thing, there’s nothing like “Conflict of Interest”, we are discussing on the notability of the this article on the basis of facts & figures, I am well aware of the wikipedia’s guideline and want to strictly follow them. That’s why I have been working so hard to make my work according to the standard of wikipedia. That’s the only intention.--iamsaa 06:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamsaa (talk • contribs)

• Further comment. In addition, user User:Asikhi appears to be "Press & Information Secretary, Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam". He's created [2] [3] and edited a few Gohar Shahi/International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam related pages. In essence what I'm saying is that there seems to be at least two press/information secrataries/office bearers/authorized representative of Gohar Shahi/Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam creating and editing (?all?) Gohar Shahi/Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam related pages on Wikipedia. Isn't that conflict of interest (and potentially very point of view) editing? Ha! (talk) 07:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both Asikhi and Iamsaa appear to be involved in a conflict of interests, given their admitted association with the organisation itself. Furthermore, Iamsaa signs his posts with with "سگِ گوھرشاہی" which reads as "Sagi Gohar Shahi," suggesting that Iamsaa may be more related to the topic than was first thought. ITAQALLAH 12:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, for two reasons, 1). I believe this is conflict of interest, point of view, as mentioned above. 2). I've read what I can find on this organization and I don't think they meet the requirements for notability. I don't think the references in the article are relevant either, for the following reasons.

Reference 1: "Gohar Shahi, chief of Anjuman-e-Sarferoshan-e-Islam, granted pre-arrest bail". a) The only reference to International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam is the first line "Gohar Shahi, chief of Anjuman-e-Sarferoshan-e-Islam, granted pre-arrest bail". The article is about Gohar Shahi, not about International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam. b) The site this comes from is not a reliable source. Karachipage.com is not a mainstream newspaper. It appears to be a copy of a story claimed to be in Dawn / News International. I can't find any mention of the story on either site although that might be because their archives don't go back to 1997.

Reference 2: "The Man in the Moon by Ardeshir Cowasjee". Not relevant. It mentions the ASI but it is referring to the American Sufi Institute, not International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam.

Reference 3: "Al-Ghunya li-talibi tariq al-haqq wa al-din by Abdul-Qadir Gilani". I can't check it. If anyone has a copy of it, it would be useful to know what is being referenced. This was written by Abdul-Qadir Gilani, who lived from 1077-1166. Logically, it can't establish notability for International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam.

Reference 4: "Bizarre Pakistani Cult Seeks Presence in India". The International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam is not the subject of this article. It is mentioned three times as an aside. The article is about the The Mehdi Foundation International and Gohar Shahi.

Reference 5: "The Beliefs and Politics of a Pseudo-Mahdist Cult". I'm not sure this meets WP:RS. I don't think this site is run by a peer reviewed journal. All I can find regarding their standards is this [4]. Also, as the article says in the intro, it's focus is the Mehdi Foundation.

Reference 6: "Younus does not belong to Anjuman-e-Sarferoshan-e-Islam"and Reference 7: "Younus does not belong to Anjuman-e-Sarferoshan-e-Islam". From goharshahi.net. Neither of these meet the standards required to be a reliable source

Reference 8: "London cab driver leads religious cult in attempted coup". I can't find the words "International", "Spiritual", "Movement", "Anjuman", "Serfaroshan-e- Islam" or "ASI" in this article. It is not about the International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam

Reference 9: "Demands by Shahbaz Khan". Same as reference 8, International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam isn't in the article.

Sorry for being so verbose and, in my earlier comments, duplicating what the nominator had already pointed out. If requested I can reduce the space I've taken. Ha! (talk) 10:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Pakistan is a 3rd world country and unfortunately the trend of INTERNET started here after 2001, that’s the reason that most of newspapers do not have archives before 2001.

However, I have tried my level best to make this article as good as I can and provide as much reference as possible. The sumary of references is given as under:

Reference 1: “Gohar Shahi, chief of Anjuman-e-Sarferoshan-e-Islam, granted pre-arrest bail". a) it is a very popular website for news and events of Karachi. b) it clearly states that His Holiness Sayyedna Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi is the founder of Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam. Moreover, I would like to mention that in Pakistan we are registered as Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam, in USA our organization is registered as American Sufi Institute and in Europe and far east it is working as R.A.G.S. International and All Faith Spiritual Organization because our message of Divine Love is for all mankind without any discrimination of caste, creed, nation or religion. All above mentioned organizations were formed by His Holiness Sayyedna Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi.

Reference 2: "The Man in the Moon by Ardeshir Cowasjee". it was used to refer Gohar Shahi’s residence and the area, which belongs to His Holiness Gohar Shahi and the international secretariate of ASI is also there. However, by mistake, I placed this reference to wrong place, which has now been corrected.

Reference 3: "Al-Ghunya li-talibi tariq al-haqq wa al-din by Abdul-Qadir Gilani". This reference was used to mention the quotation of Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani saying as: “My disciple is one who is Dhakir and I consider Dhakir only them, who are able to remember Allah with their heatbeats means who are Dhakir-e-Qulbi."

Reference 4: "Bizarre Pakistani Cult Seeks Presence in India". This reference was used to highlight the cult, which pretend to be the follower of His Holiness Gohar Shahi but actually they are not. They are working against His Holiness and his sacred mission.

Reference 5: "The Beliefs and Politics of a Pseudo-Mahdist Cult". This is a research paper on above mentioned cult and it has compared the MFI & ASI as well some intro of His Holiness Gohar Shahi. Thought, all information used in this paper are not correct but I think the author did his best.

Reference 6: "Younus does not belong to Anjuman-e-Sarferoshan-e-Islam"and

Reference 7: "Younus does not belong to Anjuman-e-Sarferoshan-e-Islam". From goharshahi.net. I think, this is an appropriate link from the official webstie of His Holiness Sayyedna Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi, because this is the official statement of International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam and it was mentioned in Reference # 5 as well.

Reference 8: "London cab driver leads religious cult in attempted coup". Its about another attempt of above mentioned cult to defame ASI and His Holiness Gohar Shahi.

Reference 9: "Demands by Shahbaz Khan". This was used to highlight the demands to curve upon the follower of Gohar Shahi by above mentioned cult.

Moreover, I am not here to promote ASI but I want to submit the correct information, which is the moto of wikipedia. There’s no conflict of interest neither I want to violate the policies of wikipedia. Still if you think that this article should be deleted, you may do that.--Iamsaa (talk) 11:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iamsaa, your own explanation here indicates that the cited sources are either trivial in their coverage of this topic--the organization, do not address the topic, or not external sources. Please realize that WP:V/WP:NPOV/WP:NOR/WP:N dictate that a topic should be covered by multiple reliable external secondary sources. Clearly that is not met here. — Scientizzle 15:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Stub Otherwise delete this article as well.--Falconkhe (talk) 11:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The existence or non-existence of other articles is is a weak rationalization for any process involving this article. — Scientizzle 15:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It should remain as an article on Wikipedia.--Asikhi (talk) 09:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The authors who have done major edits to this article have a clear conflict of interest and are using wikimedia projects as a WP:SOAPBOX to promote the subject of the articles. Also, per rationale from Scientizzle and Ha! --mikeu (talk) 16:37, 7 April 2008 (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.