| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sa'id Akhtar Rizvi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on January 3, 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.png)
prod
editEven though this is only a stub, I do not feel that this meets the WP:BIO guidelines for WP:RS on the citations ... they're simply online articles/books that have not been the subject of independent review. Without these dubious references, this stub (untouched for a month) is just WP:OR.
Also read Talk:Imamate: The Vicegerency of the Prophet to see where this article is part of a house of cards by the author to create a false impression of notability for subjects by using the same "published" source for this and other articles. --72.75.72.174 01:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- The scholar is notable for publishing multiple books. And books are widely distributed in their entirety on online Shi'a sites. --Striver - talk 18:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- Questioning on notability of writer/compiler of more than 30 books (with ISBN Nos) should be reviewed and a flag of Writer and Scholar be honored to him as the writer of any language, region or religion is a writer irrespective branch of science - because science itself is benign and has no language, region or religion. I have read some of his articles, therefore commenting that he was very good in his research. Nannadeem (talk) 19:25, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Nannadeem: What exactly does science have to do with this? Not one of the books listed in the article appear to have any scientific value. Writing many books does not make anyone notable. ISBNs are free. Refer instead to WP:AUTHOR.--Anders Feder (talk) 19:51, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Anders Feder Thanks. Science means knowledge/learning, that I mean. The religion/language is part of social science, besides a subject of communications and ethics. If you disagree I welcome you. Nannadeem (talk) 20:30, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Nannadeem: It is not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing, it is a matter of true and false. You can find an index of branches of science here and religion isn't among them.--Anders Feder (talk) 20:51, 9 August 2015 (UTC).
- I found in the prescribed list Evolutionary linguistics For Language and Theology for religion. I am afraid of edit war, so refraining myself from discussion of creating difference between science and scientific approach. My start is physics and end is in sociology (ultimate return to physics). I love physics because law of nature is still the same where is sociology is an evolutionary project (including religion and language).Nannadeem (talk) 21:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- I noticed that list was only created last week, and probably not reliable. Please refer to Outline of science. Religion (and theology) belongs under the humanities, never science.--Anders Feder (talk) 21:45, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- I found in the prescribed list Evolutionary linguistics For Language and Theology for religion. I am afraid of edit war, so refraining myself from discussion of creating difference between science and scientific approach. My start is physics and end is in sociology (ultimate return to physics). I love physics because law of nature is still the same where is sociology is an evolutionary project (including religion and language).Nannadeem (talk) 21:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Nannadeem: It is not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing, it is a matter of true and false. You can find an index of branches of science here and religion isn't among them.--Anders Feder (talk) 20:51, 9 August 2015 (UTC).
- @Anders Feder Thanks. Science means knowledge/learning, that I mean. The religion/language is part of social science, besides a subject of communications and ethics. If you disagree I welcome you. Nannadeem (talk) 20:30, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Nannadeem: What exactly does science have to do with this? Not one of the books listed in the article appear to have any scientific value. Writing many books does not make anyone notable. ISBNs are free. Refer instead to WP:AUTHOR.--Anders Feder (talk) 19:51, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- Questioning on notability of writer/compiler of more than 30 books (with ISBN Nos) should be reviewed and a flag of Writer and Scholar be honored to him as the writer of any language, region or religion is a writer irrespective branch of science - because science itself is benign and has no language, region or religion. I have read some of his articles, therefore commenting that he was very good in his research. Nannadeem (talk) 19:25, 9 August 2015 (UTC)