Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amir Allis

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 delete. Randykitty (talk) 08:34, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amir Allis[edit]

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

Granted, this is a foreign subjects so sources may be archived and offline (and the article itself says Arabic information has not been translated) but my searches found nothing to confirm this article and this has existed since February 2008 with no significant edits. The article also never lists an Arabic name to help search or anything else useful. SwisterTwister talk 00:29, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 00:31, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 00:31, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 00:31, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete without prejudice to re=-creation if someone can find sources. A 12th century Egyptian author in Arabic whose work is not translated--I can;t search for this; atthe very least we'd need the arabic characters, not a transcription of unknown origin. The information must have come from somewhere, and he may well be notable, but we can't keep something with no sources at all. I note the first version describes him as a Saudi 15th century writer, so there may be some confusion. This should have been dealt with in 2008, when the original author was still here to assist. That it's been tinkered with in details ever since without realizing the fundamental issues is unfortunately characteristic of WP. DGG ( talk ) 04:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In its current state, and with the lack of any interested editors, it seems unlikely that this article can be improved to meet notability standards. Definitely without prejudice. I can't find any sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:13, 3 September 2015 (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.