Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aziz Maraka

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. The main argument for deletion is that the sources are in a foreign language. However, that is not a valid argument for deletion. The keep rationales speak to the appropriate policies. (non-admin closure) Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:14, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aziz Maraka[edit]

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

I really don't think this article should be on the English Wikipedia. 9 out of the 10 sources on this article are in Arabic and not that much evidence of passing WP:GNG and WP:BIO, as he is rather little known to the rest of the world. This article had also been speedily deleted under A7 but was recreated. Class455 (talk|stand clear of the doors!) 17:42, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Class455 (talk|stand clear of the doors!) 17:45, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Class455 (talk|stand clear of the doors!) 17:45, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Class455 (talk|stand clear of the doors!) 17:45, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is no rule that sources need to be in English, and Wikipedia is meant to cover notable people no matter what langauge they do their activities in. Aziz is a notable musician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:19, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What difference does it make if references are not in English? Makeandtoss (talk) 20:03, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A lot actually. Barely anyone would be able to read it. That's why it shouldn't be on enwiki. Class455 (talk|stand clear of the doors!) 23:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was literally just listening to him when you replied. Anyway as far as I am aware, there are no Wikipedia policies that support this article's deletion. Makeandtoss (talk) 23:05, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I agree with Makeandtoss. Just because a lot of the references are non-English does not mean we should delete a well-sourced article. Applodion (talk) 08:24, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:10, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that non-English language sources are usable on English Wikipedia. See WP:NOENG for more information.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:58, 30 March 2017 (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.