Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi

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 keep. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:48, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

General notability not established. St John Chrysostom ^Δόξα_τω^Θεώ 13:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have searched his name online and he does not meet gng. Pass a Method talk 13:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment [1] indicates the problem here - a de facto government exists which is not recognised by anyone on the basis that it would further destabiise Somalia. [2] notes that Somalia killed 50,000 civilians in Somaliland in destroying one city in 1988 alone. Wikipedia can not involve itself in international politics, but I suggest that this one non-notable person could stay without harming the project. There is, however, no doubt that the government exists and is functioning. Invoking IAR for once. Collect (talk) 14:12, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are quite a number of online references confirming his position as Speaker of the House of Representatives of Somaliland, which is easily a notable government position. Rather than overkill, I only added two references, one from Reuters and the other from AllAfrica. There are also countless sources using the Somali spelling of his name, Cabdiraxmaan Maxamed Cabdillaahi Cirro. First Light (talk) 16:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Somalia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I have searched for him and he does not seem to meet notability requirements.George Custer's Sabre (talk) 12:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are now references from Reuters, Taylor & Francis, IRIN Africa (UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs), and AllAfrica which source his role as a notable politician (Speaker of the House of Representatives in Somaliland). A quick Google search also finds many thousands of local sources using the english version of his name[3] and thousands more using the Somali spelling.[4] This article and its subject easily pass the notability guideline for politicians: WP:POLITICIAN. First Light (talk) 15:58, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But that government is not recognized by any other - such, for rhetorical purposes, that my notability would be greater if I declared myself president-in-exile of the Confederate States of America while living in Massachusetts, USA and had a following of die-hard Southerners supporting me (or, just as well, declared myself Caliph, Emir Al Muminin, and Guardian of the Two Holy Cities as a Christian). The only way to keep this is as Collect would (nice to meet you in some non-dispute resolution process for once, and I generally agree with you there) is to invoke IAR, as the representative of a non-existent (as far as recognition goes) government. One can then charge Reuters with a semantic problem by acknowledging the unrecognized Somaliland government (as Reuters is not a sovereign nation), much as the news media always call former Governors of US States "Gov.", as if there were more than one governor at a time. St John Chrysostom ^Δόξα_τω^Θεώ 09:54, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is, however, a de facto government - and Wikipedia has had articles on de facto governments in the past, thus it would not be entirely new terriroty here to allow this one. It is, moreover, decidedly not fictitious, and has coverage in reliable sources as a government. Collect (talk) 11:30, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JohnChrysostom, I don't see thousands of articles in regional newspapers, and several articles in international and notable mainstream newspapers, about your presidency and your country. Clearly, Somaliland is notable, and this person and his position in their government is notable, according to sources and WP:POLITICIAN (all three criteria there, in fact, when only one is required). First Light (talk) 14:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep What we have here is a subject who would clearly meet WP:POLITICIAN if Somaliland were an internationally recognized country. Instead, Somaliland's status as regards international recognition seems to be much the same as that of the Confederate States of America between 1861 and 1865 - diplomatically unrecognised but widely accepted internationally as the de facto government of most of the territory it claims. However, I can't ever remember seeing a claim that Confederate congressmen fail WP:POLITICIAN, and wouldn't expect it to succeed if made - this case should be analogous. I would also make one other point more related to WP:GNG - we often have transcription problems with Somali names, and this seems to be one of those cases. 'Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi' seems to be a relatively uncommon transcription of the subject's name - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL and Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL both seem to work better (as do some missing out one of the subject's last two names and/or including his nickname (or title?) Irro, though these also seem to pick up references to other individuals). Putting these all together pick up quite a few apparently reliable references from the past six or eight years. PWilkinson (talk) 21:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sourcing exists in the article to establish notability. Unscintillating (talk) 01:17, 24 July 2012 (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.