Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khalid Amayreh
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. No one except the nominator advocates deletion of the article. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:59, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Khalid Amayreh[edit]
- Khalid Amayreh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This journalist fails WP:AUTHOR as well as WP:VICTIM. There's no significant coverage of this subject by independent sources giving any sort of in-depth treatment. This subject's conflict apparent WP:VICTIMization doesn't approach WP:BLP1E. JFHJr (㊟) 02:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- There are many sources for Khalid Amayreh, but they are nearly all self-published articles or interviews. Since these sources are discouraged in Wikipedia for BLPs, that article may have to be deleted if independent sources cannot be found.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 02:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]
- Unsure - Khalid Amayreh is one of the many journalists in Category:Journalists by nationality. It's not entirely clear what criteria are being used to establish notability in practice for journalists given the large number of articles. Amayreh seems to be one of the more widely published and prominent Palestinian journalists. He is cited by peers and others. Here are a number of books citing his work. He's reported for Al Jazeera, a prominent mainstream source, for Al-Ahram Weekly, for The Middle East Monitor (MEMO) and others. Even the BBC cited him here. JPost covered problems with the PA here. The bottomline is that he appears to be relatively prominent and widely published journalist who also happens to have had restrictions imposed on him by both the Israeli and the Palestinian authorities. Sean.hoyland - talk 05:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Fairly notable Palestinian journalist and a regular at al-Ahram Weekly. As Sean said above, what's the criteria used to establish if a journalist is notable or not? --Al Ameer son (talk) 17:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - news archive search showed a lot of returns in Middle East publications, as did Scholar google; and books as mentioned above. Obviously the article has to include more such material and could use a relevant tag. If he had been prosecuted for terrorist thought crimes for writing whatever he's written, of course, the main stream press would be all over him and he'd have dozens of WP:RS - for his guilt and evilness anyway. But evidently Middle East publications in English with editorial standards and millions of readers don't count? Could it be systematic bias vs. Arabs/Muslims/Palestinians? CarolMooreDC 04:26, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- What reliable publications exactly are give this subject substantial coverage? Not just quoting, or including things he's written? JFHJr (㊟) 04:34, 18 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The systematic bias is that some people think Arab and Muslims who don't fit the terrorist profile aren't notable no matter how frequently published, whereas writers who aren't half as notable but are some other ethnicity are not held to the same standard. I don't want to "prove a point" by bringing 15 or 20 of those articles to AfD to see what happens and then compare to about 15 articles that have been deleted despite better refs. Plus I'm not a deletionist in general. But maybe a side by side study of fifteen articles of both types is what we need to start the Wikipedia community thinking about countering the bias on this group. CarolMooreDC 05:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Is he non-notable ? I think it's probably reasonable to consider Ma'an News Agency(see their about us page) as a reliable source when it comes to Palestinian journalists, and they refer to him as 'Prominent Palestinian journalist Khalid Amayreh' here. Human Rights Watch have a section about him in their No News is Good News report (pp21-22) (with secondary source coverage by AP/Guardian here). If policy is stopping us from having articles about prominent journalists who write for major media outlets who have had restrictions placed on them that have been reported by the likes of HRW and in the media, I think we may have a problem with the way notability criteria are being applied to journalists. Sean.hoyland - talk 06:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I added your refs to talk page, citing you, with commentary on NPOV in BLP. CarolMooreDC 16:10, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Is he non-notable ? I think it's probably reasonable to consider Ma'an News Agency(see their about us page) as a reliable source when it comes to Palestinian journalists, and they refer to him as 'Prominent Palestinian journalist Khalid Amayreh' here. Human Rights Watch have a section about him in their No News is Good News report (pp21-22) (with secondary source coverage by AP/Guardian here). If policy is stopping us from having articles about prominent journalists who write for major media outlets who have had restrictions placed on them that have been reported by the likes of HRW and in the media, I think we may have a problem with the way notability criteria are being applied to journalists. Sean.hoyland - talk 06:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The systematic bias is that some people think Arab and Muslims who don't fit the terrorist profile aren't notable no matter how frequently published, whereas writers who aren't half as notable but are some other ethnicity are not held to the same standard. I don't want to "prove a point" by bringing 15 or 20 of those articles to AfD to see what happens and then compare to about 15 articles that have been deleted despite better refs. Plus I'm not a deletionist in general. But maybe a side by side study of fifteen articles of both types is what we need to start the Wikipedia community thinking about countering the bias on this group. CarolMooreDC 05:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- What reliable publications exactly are give this subject substantial coverage? Not just quoting, or including things he's written? JFHJr (㊟) 04:34, 18 January 2012 (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.