Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmed al-Nami
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Synergy 14:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ahmed_al-Nami (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)
Al nami is only notable for his minor role in the Flight 93 hijacking. He isn’t the primary subject of any reference on his page. WP:ONEEVENT says, If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted. Also, the page for Flight 93 passenger Edward P. Felt was recently deleted even though more is known about Felt’s role in the incident (his phone call was recorded) than is known about Al nami’s role Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward P. Felt (2nd nomination).Steve8675309 (talk) 01:34, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep, unless we're going to delete Lee Harvey Oswald for only being notable for a single event as well. Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 02:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I made the same point here [1]. What's different in this case is that no reliable source covers al-Nami as an individual. He's always discussed as a member of a group. Nothing is known about his actions during the hijacking. His page is just a long boring discussion of his travel and visas. Nothing there is notable. Steve8675309 (talk) 12:54, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 11:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak redirect I keep waffling on this one (almost was gonna !vote a "very weak keep"). Note that since the guy is dead, many of the WP:BLP concerns go away -- but the points in WP:BLP1E about increased maintenance overhead for the redundant material is still valid. The source seem reliable enough, but the notability of the content they cover is pretty borderline. I don't think it will hurt the project significantly to keep it, but on balance I'm going for the redirect. --Jaysweet (talk) 13:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This is silly. There's tons of well-sourced information about this obviously notable figure. The 9/11 Commission Report does cover Al Nami as an individual, from his origin to his recruitment and training to his activities in the U.S., to his appearance in various videos, to his newsworthy death. There are many, many reliable secondary sources. Like Herostratus and Tank Man, Al Nami is primarily remembered for one event, which is the way he wanted it, and like Herostratus and Tank Man he passes our notability guidelines with flying colors. Does anyone really think it would benefit Wikipedia in any way to delete a thorough, meticulously researched article on one of the 9/11 hijackers? The mind reels. (By the way, WP:ONEEVENT doesn't apply at all, since it's a part of WP:BLP and Al Nami is quite resoundingly dead.) – Quadell (talk) 18:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I made most of those points in this deletion debate for a Flight 93 passenger [2]. The page was still deleted. If wikipedia is going to follow its “non-negotiable” neutrality policy then this page should be deleted as well. Steve8675309 (talk) 23:59, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This individual is plainly someone whom many people will want to research, and there are abundant “reliable sources”. The Felt article should, of course, not have been deleted; its AfD was grossly mishandled. —SlamDiego←T 08:05, 26 July 2008 (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.