Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shams-ul-haq Azeemabadi
If I could verify it I would have". Sigh. Since DrunkenSmurf recognises that he's being a bit unpleasant, I will try not to knock him too hard for it. However, I do wish people in deletion debates would sometimes recognise that  exists.In particular, when an article states that person X is notable for having written book Y, the simple thing to do to establish  is to check that Y exists and is notable. In this case, the http://www.google.com/search?hs=n&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=%22%E2%80%98AWN-AL-MA%E2%80%98BUD%22&btnG=Search search for an idiosyncratic spelling of the second book mentioned in the article returns 475 English ghits. I would at least quadruple that, given that the rendition of Arabic into Latin characters is non-standard across the Middle East and South Asia. I further wonder how many ghits exist for this same book - one of three referenced in the article - in Arabic, Persian, Urdu, and Hindi. Further, a cursory glance at some of the ghits would reveal to the uninformed, which DrunkenSmurf is in this case, that the article subjects' name can be spelled several different ways in English as well - "Muhammad Shams al-Haqq al-'Adhim Abadi" for one among dozens of permutations.The moral? Its a good idea for everyone to recognise the limits of their specific knowledge and comparative ability to research certain subjects before thundering into deletion debates; would make the rest of us a lot happier
— User:Hornplease, 06:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BIAS||WP:V (Wikipedia:Systemic bias)