Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2025/Mohammed uzzal miah

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Delete.  --Auntof6 (talk) 22:34, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed uzzal miah (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request

BigKrow has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Only notable for social media? BigKrow (talk) 22:15, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Rukbv64bnn (talk) 11:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the concern raised by BigKrow regarding the notability of this page. However, I believe that Mohammed Uzzal Miah is notable for more than just his presence on social media. His work as a musician, influencer, and author has garnered significant attention, as evidenced by multiple media mentions, interviews, and his growing presence across various platforms. His impact, particularly within the Bangladeshi diaspora, is significant, and he continues to build a personal brand that goes beyond typical social media fame.

Additionally, his contributions to the entertainment industry and his involvement in various causes highlight his multifaceted influence, making him a relevant figure in today’s digital and entertainment landscapes. His growing music career, book publications, and engagement with audiences across multiple platforms demonstrate substantial notability. Hbbbbbbkmnnnbb (talk) 16:25, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note: Moved comments to the discussion section, CU requested (Special:Diff/10052988). MathXplore (talk) 12:27, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Deletion Nomination for Mohammed Uzzal Miah

I believe that Mohammed Uzzal Miah’s article should not be deleted based on the reasoning that he is “only notable for social media.” While it’s true that his popularity is largely driven by social media platforms, there are several key points to consider that demonstrate his broader notability:

1. Multifaceted Career

Mohammed Uzzal Miah is not just a social media influencer. He is also an author, musician, and motivational speaker. His work spans multiple domains, and his influence extends beyond the online platforms where he built his initial following. His published books have been made available on major platforms like Kobo, Storytel, and Apple Books, suggesting that his literary work reaches a broad audience. Furthermore, his music has received attention and engagement, which indicates his standing as an artist ([London Daily News](https://www.londondaily.news/mohammed-uzzal-miah-a-multifaceted-influencer-championing-human-rights-and-entrepreneurship/)).

1. Recognition from Reputable Sources

The article cites several articles and interviews from established sources such as *London Daily News* and *Fox Interviewer*, which profile him as a noteworthy figure. While it's important to ensure a diverse range of sources, these references do indicate that Uzzal Miah has garnered attention from more than just social media. For instance, an article by *London Daily News* recognizes his significant contributions as a digital influencer and entrepreneur ([London Daily News](https://www.londondaily.news/mohammed-uzzal-miah-a-multifaceted-influencer-championing-human-rights-and-entrepreneurship/)).

1. Significance in Digital Entertainment

Uzzal Miah's influence in Bangladesh and beyond should not be underestimated. In an era where digital influencers can have a significant cultural impact, his role as a content creator is important. He is a representative of a new wave of digital entrepreneurs who use platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram to build a career and influence public discourse. As these platforms grow in importance globally, the impact of such figures should not be dismissed as merely "social media fame." His influence has also been highlighted in *Fox Interviewer*, where his growth and success as a musician and social media entrepreneur are noted ([Fox Interviewer](https://foxinterviewer.com/lifestyle/untold-story-behind-a-successful-youtuber-musician-mohammed-uzzal-miah/)).

1. Impact on Social Issues

Uzzal Miah uses his platforms to advocate for social change, promote positive values, and inspire others, particularly among the youth. This added layer of activism and the promotion of social causes further adds to his notability beyond just being a content creator. His ability to influence societal discussions and inspire positive change is a significant aspect of his profile. He has been recognized for his commitment to entrepreneurship and human rights ([London Daily News](https://www.londondaily.news/mohammed-uzzal-miah-a-multifaceted-influencer-championing-human-rights-and-entrepreneurship/)).

1. Potential for Future Recognition

He is still relatively early in his career, and as he continues to grow his influence and expand into various areas (including music, books, and motivational speaking), his notability may increase. His ongoing projects, such as music collaborations and further publications, suggest that he is an evolving figure whose impact could expand. His future potential has been discussed in articles such as those on *King Newswire* and *Viberate* ([King Newswire](https://kingnewswire.com/mohammed-uzzal-miah-a-new-force-in-the-digital-entertainment-industry-2402029368/)).

In conclusion, while Uzzal Miah’s rise to prominence is largely through social media, he is an emerging figure in digital entertainment, music, and literature. Given the scope of his work and the recognition he has received from credible sources, I believe his notability extends beyond mere social media fame and warrants retention of the article. I recommend improving the article with more independent and diverse sources to ensure it meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines.

--Rukbv64bnn (talk) 08:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Delete The load of advertisement and non-simple language make it not worth others' fixing. The sources on Fox Interviewer and London Daily News may mean he is notable enough, but I don't want to use time for a background search of how great those websites are. 微甜微酸微苦＿＿微鹹 (talk) 16:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for your input. I understand your frustration with the use of sources like Fox Interviewer and London Daily News, and I agree that the reliability of those sites may be questionable. I will take your feedback into account and focus on finding more credible sources to improve the article. It’s important that we use references that align with Wikipedia's standards for verifiability. If you have any suggestions for better sources or specific areas to focus on, I would greatly appreciate your help in improving the article. Rukbv64bnn (talk) 11:24, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I believe that Mohammed Uzzal Miah is notable for more than just his presence on social media. His work as a musician, influencer, and author has garnered significant attention, as evidenced by multiple media mentions, interviews, and his growing presence across various platforms. His impact, particularly within the Bangladeshi diaspora, is significant, and he continues to build a personal brand that goes beyond typical social media fame. Hbbbbbbkmnnnbb (talk) 16:29, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Delete Just a Promotion of subject in the page --Ksy 15:48, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for your comments. I understand your concern that the page may seem overly promotional, and I agree that Wikipedia articles should avoid excessive promotion of the subject. I will review the content and ensure that it adheres to Wikipedia's guidelines for neutrality, removing any promotional language and improving the overall balance. If you have any specific suggestions or areas of concern, please feel free to share. Your feedback is valuable in helping maintain the quality of the article. Rukbv64bnn (talk) 11:26, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for raising your concerns. I share your view that sources such as London Daily News—and any press releases, blogs, or IMDB entries used without proper context—are problematic from a reliability standpoint. We should avoid using sources designed primarily for SEO or promotional purposes, and instead rely on independent, reliable sources that comply with Wikipedia’s guidelines (see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources).

  Regarding your point on undisclosed paid contributions and WP:PAID, I will review the contributions and source disclosures to ensure they comply with the policy. If any sources or edits are found to be promotional or in violation of WP:PAID, we should address them accordingly.

  I propose that we compile a list of all questionable sources used in the article and review them collaboratively. Once we’ve assessed which sources fail to meet our criteria, we can work on removing or replacing them with verifiable, independent sources that help establish the article’s notability and reliability.

  Please let me know if you have any specific suggestions or if you’d like to work together on this review. Rukbv64bnn (talk) 11:38, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I get where you're coming from about the page feeling a bit promotional, but the intention here is to focus on his actual achievements and impact. It's not just about social media – the page highlights his work in music, his published books, and the media coverage he's received, which helps show why he’s notable. The references used are from reputable sources that cover his career, not just his social media presence. The goal is to present his story, not promote him. Hbbbbbbkmnnnbb (talk) 16:32, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Delete Extremely promotional article. Nobody should ever be using London Daily News as a source. "Contributors" sign up, with a payment based on if they want to be an "agency" or "individual". It's a site perfectly designed for SEO, spam and promotional articles. So throw that one out. Multiple press releases being used as sources. Blogs used as sources. IMDB used as sources. And all of these replies are AI generated. When the creators are using deliberate spammy sites to create sources, it's not worth the time from good-faith editors to review, source and fix utter junk from paid editors. Ravensfire (talk) 04:40, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for your comments, Ravensfire. I appreciate your concerns regarding the use of London Daily News as a source, as well as the reliance on press releases, blogs, and IMDB. I agree that these sources may not meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and reliability, particularly when they are used in a promotional context or as primary references. I will review the article and ensure that the sources are replaced with more reliable and credible references. If you have specific suggestions for suitable sources, I would be grateful for your input. The goal is to maintain the quality and integrity of the article, and I appreciate your help in achieving that.

  This response addresses the issues raised, offers an intention to correct the article, and invites collaboration to improve the content. Rukbv64bnn (talk) 11:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The AI generated response just helps prove how little effort the creator is putting into this. Make a point without using AI text and I'll review it and respond. Ravensfire (talk) 14:24, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I understand your concern Sir, but my response wasn’t AI generated. I took the time to write it myself for reply. Sir If there’s something specific in my reply that made it seem otherwise, let me know, and I’ll clarify. I’m here to have a constructive discussion and address any concerns you have. Sir Let’s focus on the content and how we can improve it. Rukbv64bnn (talk) 15:57, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Since you ignore every piece of advice given - continue to use AI for responses, continue to use utter garbage source and continue to edit in an obviously promotional manner - I'm done with advice. The article should be deleted as it fails any rational idea of notability with no actualy reliable sources to support it. Just a promotional article to promote a non-notable person. Not wasting my time with this nonsense any further. Ravensfire (talk) 04:57, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi Sir Ravensfire, Thank you for sharing your feedback. I understand your concerns about the notability of the subject and the quality of the sources. I am actively working on improving the article by adding more reliable, independent sources and ensuring the content adheres to Wikipedia’s guidelines for neutrality.I appreciate that you took the time to review the article, and I am committed to making the necessary improvements. If you have any specific suggestions or examples of areas that could be better, I would be grateful for your guidance. I hope that with these updates, the article will meet the necessary standards for inclusion. I understand if you disagree, but I believe it's worth giving time to revise and improve before making a final judgment on deletion. Best regards, Rukbv64bnn (talk) 08:32, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Delete For the websites cited as references are unreliable, and the content inscribed therein concerning the subject fails to fulfill the general criteria of notability. Furthermore, the entirety of the composition is orchestrated in a manner akin to self-promotion.Zjui3r (talk) 19:35, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The page meets the notability guidelines as it is supported by reliable sources. While some improvements may be needed, deletion is not the appropriate solution. Instead, any concerns about self-promotion or sourcing should be addressed through content revisions and better citations rather than removal. Rukbv64bnn (talk) 08:27, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 22:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.