Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ibrahim Ahmad Maqari

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. ✗plicit 14:35, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ibrahim Ahmad Maqari

[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)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBLP. The subject has no significant coverage in sources cited in the article, as well as few other I checked which are not cited. Multiple paragraphs uncited, and WP:Citation overkill just for the statement: "He is the present Imam of the National Mosque Abuja, he's always straddling between Abuja, Zaria and Kano on a weekly basis." – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 21:48, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table: prepared by User:Kavyansh.Singh
https://www.bbc.com/hausa/labarai-55932475	Per WP:RS/PS#BBC	Per WP:RS/PS#BBC	? unable to judge due to the article being in a foreign language	? Unknown
https://sheikhmaqary.com.ng/e-books	apparently a self published website	looks like someone's personal website	merely some pdfs of books	✘ No
https://www.abujanationalmosque.org/management/	primary source, website of the Mosque		I don't see a single mention of "Ibrahim Maqari"	✘ No
https://www.blueprint.ng/appoint-chief-imam-for-national-mosque-abuja/	media outlet with independent coverage		just one passing mention	✘ No
https://dailytrust.com/time-to-appoint-chief-imam-for-national-mosque	media outlet with independent coverage		passing mentions	✘ No
https://www.legit.ng/1414305-paying-ransom-kidnappers-permitted-islam-islamic-cleric.html	?	? not sure	passing mentions, merely using Maqari's statements does not make his notable.	✘ No
https://dailynigerian.com/hausa/saudiyya-ce-ke-horas-da-yan-taadda-babban-limamin-abuja/	media outlet with independent coverage		one passing mention	✘ No
https://hausa.legit.ng/1426412-abduljabbar-sheikh-maqary-ya-yi-karin-haske-bayan-wasu-kalamansa-sun-tada-kura.html	?	? not sure		? Unknown
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 21:48, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:59, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:59, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:59, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - it is also so poorly written from a grammatical perspective that it's an embarrassment and detraction to Wikipedia. Ira Leviton (talk) 02:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Because the grammatical perspective were fixed and furthermore English is not our native language! We're all here to give our contributions best on our little knowledge. Nobody is perfect, so I think that's the advantage of everyone can edit Wikipedia pages as far as he had created an account and has the ability to do so with the wiki rules. Ira Leviton you can help us and fixed some grammatical errors. thank you all Salihu Aliyu (talk) 09:21, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes @Salihu Aliyu, I agree that prose and grammar issues should not be a reason for deleting an article. At AfD, we determine notability. But, if the topic is not notable, then no level of editing can make it notable. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:07, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:44, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Yes I agree, grammar issues are not a reason to deleta an article, if it is otherwise noteworthy. Grammar can be fixed. However, the analysis of the RS here seems to indicate it isn't notable. Deathlibrarian (talk) 01:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:05, 15 February 2022 (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.