Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eman Sharobeem

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 snow keep. (non-admin closure) gidonb (talk) 06:31, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eman Sharobeem[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This is a prime case of WP:ONEEVENT: a figure who would at best have greatly struggled to pass WP:GNG is the subject of a high-profile corruption investigation, and gets an article that is really only about the investigation. ICAC inquiries often lead to this sort of publicity even though the targets are frequently themselves non-notable. The Drover's Wife (talk) 12:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 12:32, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 12:32, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:11, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:11, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - No, it's not a one event person. The subject was previously added to the Project Women in Red where the main focus of the sources provided is her activism against abuse against women, as she has been featured in national Australian press (ABC, SBS) and received awards for her work. See: Women in Red. Rather than rush to delete, it's clear that there is plenty to add regarding her activism. I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 15:55, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've added more sources (pre-ICAC). It is clearly not a single event bio page. I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 16:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She received substantial coverage relating to her activism, and the recognition she received for it, prior to the ICAC investigation. AusLondonder (talk) 09:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep NOM has a point, subject is almost a single event, but I suggest there is just enough now with before and after ICAC to support GNG. Aoziwe (talk) 12:25, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there is enough about her activism for me to say that WP:ONEEVENT does not apply here. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 13:44, 20 September 2018 (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.