Faraz Rabbani: Failed notability Ontor22 ( talk ) 06:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising , Philosophy , Academics and educators , Islam , Pakistan and Canada .  Ontor22 ( talk ) 06:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Rabbani has got some nice coverage here , in The Revival of Islamic Rationalism: Logic, Metaphysics and Mysticism in Modern Muslim Societies by Masooda Bano , published by CUP, and I suppose there should be more but I will take a look later.  ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:16, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ayesha S. Chaudhry , happens to cover him nicely in Domestic Violence and the Islamic Tradition , published by OUP, from p. 159 onwards.  ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Not sure how much but it appears that there is some good stuff in Islamic Reform in South Asia from 388 onwards but I am not able to get a preview of pages from 389-92.  ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:21, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There is one more paragraph in Brill's Muslim Subjectivities in Global Modernity: Islamic Traditions and the Construction of Modern Muslim Identities ; and these all make me believe that Rabbani satisfies GNG and I support Keep ing this article.  ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Not satisfactory.  Repeated views from a site.  google.books is primary source.  Apart from that, self-published.  Reliable sources independent of the subject is absent.  GNG doesn't show up everywhere.  Ontor22 ( talk ) 15:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This simply means you have failed to understand what Google Books is and where do these resources come from.  These are independent, reliable and highly trusted sources from the Cambridge University Press , Oxford University Press and the BRILL ; if you don't understand how that works, I am sorry, you need to go through WP:RS , WP:IS and WP:SIGCOV .  You do not even know what Google Books is, and this is a pretty good reason to say that you have not done the necessary WP:BEFORE before filing this AfD nomination.  FYI, Google Books is not any source but a service to look for resources available on any given topic.  I am not sure how the works published by CUP, OUP and the BRILL are "self-published".  This is really a weird nomination.  ─ The Aafī (talk) 16:21, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Appreciate your statement.  I aren't unable to understand Google Books.  If so, you should start creating articles of all the mentioned people in Google Books/Press.  I believe it is reliable but not satisfactory, so I said.  Can you clarify the issue by showing the published online version or print of reliable newspaper?  Ontor22 ( talk ) 16:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] None of these are newspapers and neither is it required for them to be.  The details of all of these resources is provided within the links I have included.  None of these databases avail free access to their resources for each and everything so I am sorry but I am linking the sources once again: Disputing Contraception: Muslim Reform, Secular Change and Fertility ( Islamic Reform in South Asia , p. 388), Global Shifts and the Rise of Islamic Rationalism ( The Revival of Islamic Rationalism , p. 23), Domestic Violence and the Islamic Tradition (p. 159 onwards; unfortunately I cannot view anything but what is available on Google Books preview, WP:TWL does not have access to Oxford) and the BRILL , The Modernity of Neo-Traditionalist Islam ( Muslim Subjectivities in Global Modernity , p. 126).  I can see there is much more than this "much" and it is enough to presume that Rabbani passes WP:GNG .  ─ The Aafī (talk) 17:07, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources mentioned by User:TheAafi above.  Insight 3 ( talk ) 14:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] KEEP per sources shown above by The Aafī , passes WP:GNG .  Ngrewal1 ( talk ) 21:32, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources  by User:TheAafi.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 10:12, 1 July 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep