Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khalid AlHail

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 delete. Treating this as a WP:SOFTDELETE due to minimal participation. Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Khalid AlHail[edit]

Khalid AlHail (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This Qatari opposition figure is a hoax created by the pro-government Egyptian paper Youm7, which has a reputation for fabricating stories. Especially telling is that the only news sources I can find about this group of 30,000+ democracy activists (!) all lead back to this article by Youm7. Elspamo4 (talk) 23:53, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. sst✈(discuss) 00:38, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:32, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  21:55, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Qatar-related deletion discussions. Human3015TALK  22:00, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:58, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The main claim of notability is for founding a major political organization that does not appear to actually exist. Happy to recreate if proper sources become available, of course - but there isn't enough to support an article, let alone a BLP. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 17:26, 11 January 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.