Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abelhaleem Hasan Abdelraziq Ashqar

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 05:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Abelhaleem Hasan Abdelraziq Ashqar[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 subject fails the WP:BLP1E test. All sources indicate he was a minor figure in this event. ~~Technically, he passes WP:NPROF, but~~ it is impossible to write a NPOV article on this subject because there is nothing else that can be reliable sourced about him. ~~NPROF is a guideline and not a rule. It has exceptions and I believe this is one of them.~~ --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Given that page includes an improperly formatted list of "Sources" (Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals,... ) this may well be the worst WP:BEFORE fail that I have ever seen.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not WP:FILIBUSTER. I did BEFORE but, unlike you, I was trying to write a WP:BLPBALANCED article. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:35, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:05, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as BLP1E. I am puzzled why the nom thinks the subject passes WP:Prof. Can he explain in which category? Xxanthippe (talk) 02:22, 14 May 2019 (UTC).[reply]
- I was under the false impression that all full professors met WP:NACADEMIC. I stand corrected. Thank you! --- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:40, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - BLP1E. nableezy - 06:42, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BLP1E....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:22, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the page has a list of plausible links, most of which no longer work. Tracking one down I found: (Palestinian Puzzle; A Business Professor in Springfield Goes on Trial Today On U.S. Charges of Supporting Hamas. He Strongly Denies It.: [FINAL Edition] Mary Beth Sheridan - Washington Post Staff Writer. The Washington Post; Washington, D.C. [Washington, D.C]19 Oct 2006: B.1.], behingd a paywall. An open access copy available here: [1]. I suggest that editors invest a little time examining sources. Page asserts that he was convicted and sentenced to prison. But at this point, I am not even certain what name to search under, the article I did find does not use all four names. Let's make a good faith effort to untangle this puzzle.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A rather easy one, actually, once you get the right keywords for searching (which would be Ashqar+Virginia+Hamas, Ashqar+Virginia+President - loads and loads of news items, book hits and journal articles). The subject is clearly not a BLP1E, as he is a public figure who ran to replace Yasser Arafat as Palestinian Authority president (see - 2005 Palestinian presidential election) - and he got 2.76% of the vote (Hamas did not run officially - an outside US figure made this run possible). In depth Al-Jazeera profile from 2003. The electoral run was covered in Washington Post as well as elsewhere. The subsequent criminal case, which ended in a conviction and jail time, clearly meets WP:NCRIME with rather significant and sustained national and international level coverage: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. Coverage in this book. The criminal case itself definitely passes NCRIME (so even if this were a BLP1E - this would be a rename at best), however given that the subject here has been profiled and covered also in contexts other than the criminal case a standalone bio here makes sense. Icewhiz (talk) 15:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
WP:HEYMANN KEEP. I have done a modest expand, source, using only a few of the available sources, which include a long profile in the Washington Post. And Note that subject was in the national news form 2004 - 2007, and that he was convicted and imprisoned.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:44, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You mean you duplicated entire paragraphs multiple times? Ok ... nableezy - 16:41, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, you only proved that it impossible to write a NPOV article about a living person based on the coverage available about him. The case is regarded as demonstrating the difficulty of convicting individuals who assist militants... and Although Ashqar was recorded discussing violent attacks... are each repeated three times. He was convicted for refusing to testify for crying out loud. Everything else he did was technically legal. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:35, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected duplication. thank you.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:48, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have copyedited the page which had several instances where the sources were misattributed to some other organization. I will assume good faith chalk that up to several mistakes. However, the article still relies almost entirely on this source. We have no idea if this article was retracted but it does not appear anywhere on The Washington Post website. This article still fails WP:BLP1E. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:50, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As for your assertion that you corrected "the L.A. Times masked as the Chicago Tribune). What you did was miss the fact that this was a Chicago Tribune story that the Los Angeles Times also printed. And erase it. The Chicago Tribune should appear in the cite as the "Agency". My apologies if I misformatted it. I do at least try to credit the correct newspaper.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:14, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The WaPo article is easily accessed via proquest, where I read it. It is a detailed biographical profile of Ashqar: (Palestinian Puzzle; A Business Professor in Springfield Goes on Trial Today On U.S. Charges of Supporting Hamas. He Strongly Denies It.: [FINAL Edition],Mary Beth Sheridan - Washington Post Staff Writer. The Washington Post; Washington, D.C. [Washington, D.C]19 Oct 2006: B.1. ). Mary Beth Sheridan is still at WaPo, and she's on twitter, if you truly think I made this up go ahead and ask her if she wrote this 2006 profile.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:05, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is extensive coverage of his presidential bid (in Arabic as well) - we are at 2E at least, not 1E. If we were at 1E, the correct move would be to rename for the notable criminal case, but we aren't there.Icewhiz (talk) 21:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite them. That is exactly what is needed to prove notability, which I don't see at this time. People run for office all the time and that does not mean their candidacy is notable. Otherwise, this should be deleted. The person's notability is right now entirely inherited from the court case involving three people not just Ashqar. This page as been in violation of BLP for years.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:28, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Washington Post: Va. Man Certified as Candidate to Replace Arafat.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:02, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Still inherited notability from concurrent criminal proceedings. If you read the article, it has little to do with the candidacy. His candidacy is a coatrack for The Washington Post to repurpose their previous coverage. Also note that Howard University is in Washington, D.C. Of course, the local paper latched on to this. See for example these sources which shows that his notability was inherited from the fact that he was accused of a crime when he ran for office. Separating his candidacy into a stub section shows desperation to keep this page no matter what. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:33, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ashqar placed 8th, with 2.68% of the vote. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:34, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nah. It shows that the candidacy was covered in newspapers in Israel, Australia, Britain and the United States. The British, Israeli, and Aussie papers that I cited/read do not even mention the arrest.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:40, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Covered" or mentioned in passing? Without seeing the sources I cannot judge that he was not just listed among the 8 or more candidates. Can you quote from the sources you cited please? Assuming good faith, I am sure the subject was mentioned. But I have serious doubts that his candidacy was "covered" without also covering his concurrent criminal case. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:48, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also link to ProQuest so people with access can assess the sources not available elsewhere. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:55, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We enter BLP 3E with his prison hunger strikes. The first was in 1998, when he refused to testify against Mousa Mohammed Abu Marzook in a New York Court.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In your desperation to keep the page, you have introduce so much unsourced material. I have also lost any ability to assume good faith in you since you don't link to the sources AND you add things not in sources when I locate them. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:23, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I do this kind of sourcing for several articles a month that come to AfD poorly sourced, but that appear to me to be notable topics. Sometimes I do several a week. I do not feel "desperate" about this one. More like intrigued. What is unusual is to meet an editor so determined to challenge solid sourcing. Please remove the failed verification tags from the Reuters article about the 1998 prison fast that ran in the Washington Post and that is plainly visible in a Proquest Newspaper search. E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:31, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you have previously used original research to filibuster deletions does not mean it was a good thing. I have pointed out many instances now of where you, I assume through lack skill, have introduced content that is not in the sources you cite. I give up, you have succeeded by WP:REFBOMB. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Place 4th is the presidential elections. We have multiple in-depthmsources for this subject spanning 2 decades.Icewhiz (talk) 03:48, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

e.g. - This Springer book - pages 279-280 - covering one of his hunger strikes.Icewhiz (talk) 07:31, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also note that we are at least at 3E - the case from 1998 - in which his hunger strike is widely covered, the case from 2003+ (with a second long hunger strike), and the presidential campaign. Icewhiz (talk) 07:35, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEYMANN thanks to E.M.Gregory and Icewhiz. The subject certainly meets WP:GNG, with significant, sustained coverage in independent reliable sources, including the New York Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, the BBC and a solid two paras in the book The grand jury: A tool to repress and jail activists. And that's only in English, apart from one source in Arabic - I expect that there would be a lot more. I hope that those who agreed with the WP:BLP1E nomination rationale, based on the state of the article at the time of nomination, will reconsider now it has been shown that coverage of the subject is about far more than a single event. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:00, 20 May 2019 (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.