Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Al Ajlouni

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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Al Ajlouni[edit]

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

Fails WP:BIO, non-notable JMHamo (talk) 00:00, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 00:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 00:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Neutral. If article is to be believed, passes WP:JOURNALIST. Xxanthippe (talk)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 18:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can't find sources that verifies he passes WP:JOURNALIST; I can't even find sources that makes him pass WP:BASIC. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 16:05, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nothing at all actually suggesting the necessary notability. SwisterTwister talk 07:09, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Article written with too much fluff. Seems to be written for self-promotion. Leaning towards delete, due to too much fluff, yet not much notability. Conspirasee1 (talk) 10:38, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 20:43, 1 May 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.