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.
Still questionable for the applicable notability as this contains only one source, from the New York Times, and although my searches found other links at Books and News, there has not been anything particularly convincing this can be a solidly notably improved article. My attempts at any available English Tunisian sources have not been successful, so unless native sources that are sufficient can be found, there's still questionability. I should also note the original author is G5 material since this was August 2013, and the user was first kicked in May 2013, however, since a user added a few changes afterwards, it's unlikely therefore solid G5 material. SwisterTwistertalk 07:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The subject meets WP:BASIC. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below. North America1000 08:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Sometimes the default "find sources" links atop discussion do not provide much coverage; sources can often be found by customizing search terms a bit and not relying only on Google. See also: Criticism of Google § Possible misuse of search results. North America1000 15:45, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Adequate indicia of notability. Another round of people from the third world who do not easily pop up in Google or English language sources. Yet another AfD waste of bandwidth. Montanabw(talk) 23:07, 30 May 2016 (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.
