Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gilead Ini

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 redirect to Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America#Wikipedia campaign. MBisanz ^talk 23:15, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gilead Ini[edit]

Gilead Ini is not notable cojoco (talk) 10:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More information: Gilead Ini is an employee of CAMERA, and was presumed to be one of the editors involved in the Wikilobby campaign. However, there does not appear to be any other reason for his notability. While not reasons for deletion, the article has very little information about Gilead Ini, no information that is not present in other articles, and little information has been added since the article was created in June 2008. I placed a "notability" tag at the head of the article a few days ago, and nothing has happened. cojoco (talk) 11:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I'll admit it's hard to see how this will develop into anything more than a stub, but that seems to be the case for many otherwise useful biographical pages. In the meantime, I believe he is notable, due not only to his role in CAMERA but also to the media reach he has achieved (the first few are articles by him, but then there are several articles quoting him). J L G 4 1 0 4 11:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep considering his growing play in media, lest anyone forget his initial splash (or flash or flop) in his first 15 minutes of fame, so to speak. CasualObserver'48 (talk) 13:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 20:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 20:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sorry guys, but an Arbcom case doesn't make a person notable. The measly 26 ghits he gets are articles written by him, not coverage of him. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 22:13, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But he's quoted in major papers, so the media sees him as an authority on something. Is that not sufficient? I'll change my recommendation if someone could explain this. I understand that being quoted as an authority is not the same as have a feature article written about the guy and his exploits, but both seem like indicators of notability. J L G 4 1 0 4 11:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the ghits linked above are articles written by him. Of the few that actually mention him, they are essentially the same article copied in a number of different publications. In addition, being quoted doesn't make something notable per WP:BIO, there must be coverage of him. Being quoted isn't coverage.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 04:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nn; per BC -- Y not? 20:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — his notability is tenuous at best. This may change in the future, but Wikipedia is about the past and the established present. -- Olve Utne (talk) 20:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Aitias // discussion 00:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, He doesn't seem especially notable to me.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 06:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America#Wikipedia campaign. He is assocciated to one event and we have coverage that event at the CAMERA article. The information is better developed at the target article so no material to merge. -- Whpq (talk) 18:57, 25 February 2009 (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.