Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Arab References

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Middle East. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Middle East|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions ( prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Middle East. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{ transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{ prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Middle East/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Middle East

Country deletion sorting

Bahrain

2024 Sakhir Formula 3 round

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

Having checked through per WP:BEFORE, significant coverages ( WP:SIGCOV) are rather poor for most 2nd and below tier formula classes given the reason for this nominations. Sources consists of almost entirely of WP:PRIMARY. Additionally, Wikipedia is not a sportsheet for the most ardent of fans ( WP:NOTSTATS), whom anything less than first tier formula classes appeals to. WP:AFD will be a redirect or merge to 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship (edit) and 2024 FIA Formula 2 Championship.

I am also nominating the following related pages for this same reason with more to be added in:

Further additions for this same reason above):

SpacedFarmer ( talk) 19:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 19:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:57, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bahrain-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 20:02, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep all - It's standard practice to routinely split out individual races from their parent (season) article. This keeps the parent article (in this case 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship) readable. Your suggestion to merge, while also being a full admittance that there is notable content here, would cause the parent article to be far too cluttered. WP:SIZESPLIT and WP:NOMERGE once again apply here. ~~"...whom anything less than first tier formula classes appeals to." That is your personal opinion and one which quite obviously has a lot of disagreement.~~ ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 23:21, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Furthermore, suggesting 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship as an ATD for the F2 races you bundled in is pure nonsense. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 23:24, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
- What about WP:NOTSTATS? 5225_C ( talk • contributions) 05:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  "Where statistics are so lengthy as to impede the readability of the article, the statistics can be split into a separate article and summarized in the main article. (e.g., statistics from the main article 2012 United States presidential election were moved to a related article Nationwide opinion polling for the 2012 United States presidential election)." This language seems to support the splitting of these individual races. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 07:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  I wouldn't have minded them to exist if reliable third party sources exists to back them up, but no, we get sources consisting of mainly WP:PRIMARY or nothing and do we need an WP:INDISCRIMINATE amount of sports results to clutter Wikipedia with, especially those the most ardent minority of nerds bother with. There's always a home for them in Fandom. Nothing wrong with that site, though. People should think before shoving junk into Wikipedia. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 14:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  But you're not understanding that these are not standalone articles; their notability is established through sources which exist in the main article including Formula Scout and Autosport. The personal aspects of your rationale also really needs to stop, posthaste. Personal attacks like calling people "nerds" and calling their efforts "junk" are part of what got you sent to ANI before. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 15:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  Wow, such snowflakes like the modern times, getting upset by words like 'nerds', I thought nerds like being called nerds. I was a car nerd at one time and am not ashamed of that label. I call 'efforts' like this junk because people write crap. Worse is that there is no source. Is this the standards Wikipedia is heading to?
  
  "their notability is established through sources which exist in the main article including Formula Scout and Autosport" ...and not much else as checked WP:BEFORE. So 3 sources make a subject notable per WP:SIGCOV. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 19:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  
  The statistics "split off" (they weren't split, these article were created separately) are not actually significant. The only significant results of feeder series are the championship results, which are already included on the relevant season article. 5225_C ( talk • contributions) 00:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  "(they weren't split, ...)" - Yes they were; the initial versions of these pages were redirects to the main article created by MaxLikesStuff, created out of WP:REDLINKS at the redirect target. Radioactive39 then converted these redirects into sub-articles in order to add content rather than add it to the main article and clutter it up. The stats in these sub-articles are summarized in the main article. There is nothing in NOTSTATS which indicates that these sub-articles are in violation of it. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 04:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Saudi Arabia, France, Italy, Spain, and Australia. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 23:23, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Formula One is the top tier of the sport and one of the (if not the single) most prestigious category in motorsport as a whole. The F1 equivalent pages to the ones included in this nomination, using this article as an example, contain little more additional information. Reading WP:NOTSTATS, the only thing these pages are missing is a little more summarised information. The nominated pages display the information in clear, concise tables and they provide information that is not available in the main season articles ( 2024 Formula 2 Championship and 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship) and add context to the relevant motorsport championship. Romero13 ( talk) 10:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Fandom are always there for fans like you. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 14:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per above discussion. These are not standalone articles — if you nominate these few you should go all the way back to 2004 and list all rounds of previous F3000, GP2, Formula 2, GP3 and Formula 3 seasons. But as much as some lack sufficient prose, all are notable individually and WP:SECONDARY coverage exists. Nominator also gets a WP:TROUT for their uncivil comments. MSport1005 ( talk) 18:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
"But as much as some lack sufficient prose..." I noticed that 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship does have summaries of the races in its prose, in line with the above-quoted section of WP:NOTSTATS which I opine supports our keep !votes. This is the exact standard which I believe we strive for on Wikipedia as a whole; SUMMARY-style prose in the main article, stats tables split out into their own sub-articles. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 18:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
- Sounds good to me. They aren't independently after all. 5225_C ( talk • contributions) 00:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep. As mentioned above, these articles may not have any prose, but they have been a staple of the site for years, with GP2 and GP3 having had their individual race articles.

Bahrain Proposed deletions

Egypt

Egypt Proposed deletions

Iran

Adel Shirazy

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

I see nothing that persuades me that he passes WP:BIO, nor WP:NPROF, nor WP:NPOLITICIAN, nor WP:NATHLETE. A draft of this name already exists. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:42, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:42, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Politicians, and Poetry. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete. Lots of resume-material involving his works, miscellaneous papers, work experience, and poetry writing, but nothing that seems to definitively secure his notability. Closest thing might be his (failed?/successful?) candidacy for the assembly. The recent COI activity doesn't help either. GuardianH ( talk) 15:18, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment: This appears to be part of a cross multiple wiki spamming exercise by the creating editor. There is a possibility that this is self promotion, whcih I rate currently at a 0.75 probability. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

2022 CAFA U-14 Championship

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

An article that lacks sufficient substantiated coverage. Not enough secondary sources. Not enough notability. Wikipedia is not a site for listing statistics. EpicAdventurer ( talk) 17:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Tajikistan. EpicAdventurer ( talk) 17:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect – To Central Asian Football Association#Events timeline as WP:ATD. Svartner ( talk) 18:11, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I have included additional reliable sources to substantiate the article. The tournament holds significant notability, similar to other CAFA tournaments that have their own pages. Lunar Spectrum96 ( talk) 19:25, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Iran. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:44, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply
i added additional reliable sources since EpicAdventurer delete nomination ? Lunar Spectrum96 ( talk) 22:01, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:28, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:25, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. I don't think an under-14s tournament merits a redirect. Giant Snowman 10:31, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Sadakiyans

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

I was not able to verify the existence of this dynasty - the four references used in the article are also difficult to verify. Semsûrî ( talk) 19:10, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Semsûrî ( talk) 19:10, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:54, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4, p. 227: "In other towns, too, Arab chieftains came to build their castles and dominated the inhabitants ... in Urmiya Sadaqa b. 'Ali, a client of Azd". See also https://iranicaonline.org/articles/rawwadids. I cannot verify the article as a whole or confirm if this is a notable dynasty, but it does not appear to be a fabrication. Srnec ( talk) 00:10, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete sourcing is weak, and does not sufficiently convey the idea of a "dynasty"; if the individuals involved are notable, they should have their own article, but their three-generation "dynasty" is almost certainly not. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:02, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply
The reason that there is so little knowledge about them is that they lived over 1,000 years ago and only ruled for around 50 years in a region wich was made up of villages, lots of mountains and a few small cities. Besides that, they seem to be the first Kurdish dynasty in History, so little information is to be expected. Karkafs Desiderium ( talk) 00:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 20:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

AbdolReza Razmjoo

AfDs for this article:

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

A previous article on this person was deleted at AFD in 2020. This one is different enough such that CSD G4 doesn't apply, but I still don't think he has received enough significant coverage in reliable sources to meet WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. DanCherek ( talk) 21:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Iran. DanCherek ( talk) 21:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete: Only sources I find are where to stream his songs. what's used now in the article doesn't seem helpful, a registration number and his own website, then some allmusic listings. Lack of sourcing. Oaktree b ( talk) 03:11, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Don't delete: He is a composer and expert of Iranian radio and television, as well as the composer of several symphonies and film scores 2A01:5EC0:781E:549C:99AD:7DEB:D56:1127 ( talk) 01:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 20:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Notcoin

AfDs for this article:

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

Procedural nomination per WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 11#Notcoin, as the redirect target of Telegram (software), or any other target, was not found suitable. The page had been moved to draftspace on the day of its creation, as not ready for mainspace, however the creator had rejected the draftification. Jay 💬 06:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Games, and Software. Jay 💬 06:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already at AFD before so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read!
Talk!} 05:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge to Telegram: Significant coverage in BBC Pidgin and likely in the non-English articles as well (which I cannot read). Telegram article is long but could easily accommodate a short section on the game, which seems to have drawn attention. Mrfoogles ( talk) 07:26, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete what is this? A game? A crypto-coin? A ponzi scheme? The sources don't say (and are largely about a related game called "Hamster Combat"), which demonstrates that there is insufficiently substantial coverage. Walsh90210 ( talk) 18:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
- I am opposed to a redirect to Telegram (software). If this content were on the Telegram article, I would remove it as WP:UNDUE and inherently somewhat promotional. Walsh90210 ( talk) 23:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment: The Persian article has همستر کامبت (Hamster Kombat) as the article subject: https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%87%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B1_%DA%A9%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%AA Hamster Kombat and Notcoin seem like they are separate crypto games on Telegram? From machine translation and the images, the sources cited in the English article, like this one, appear to be about Hamster Kombat or crypto games in general, not about Notcoin. For a redirect, Telegram (software) seems an appropriate target. I'll abstain from voting, though, because I can't read most of the coverage on these games. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ ( talk) 02:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: In the first AFD discussion, the closure was Delete but this discussion is bringing up more possible outcomes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read!
Talk!} 03:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Redirect to The Open Network (TON). The Persian-language sources seem to be primarily about a hamster-related game of a different name that employs the Notcoin/"Natcoin" token. But I'm not seeing WP:SIGCOV for Notcoin itself, at least not in sources that clear WP:NCRYPTO; however, WP:TRADES sources ( [1], [2]) do show evidence that it's a major game/token on TON, so as an AtD that redirect makes sense. Like Walsh90210 I would oppose a redirect to Telegram. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 13:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete Yet more unimportant cryptotrash. Nate • ( chatter) 16:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Maryam Rostampour and Marziyeh Amirizadeh

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

Opening this deletion discussion per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE on the talk page ( here). Would love to hear editors' thoughts going forward. GnocchiFan ( talk) 22:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Comment: I would urge anyone who comments in this discussion to look on the talk page from (one of) the subjects of the article. GnocchiFan ( talk) 16:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep: I think that Marziyeh Amirizadeh is too notable to delete. Maryam Rostampour is arguably notable as well, despite the fact that Marziyeh Amirizadeh is the only one of the two with continuing coverage. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 01:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Christianity, Islam, Iran, and Georgia (U.S. state). Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 01:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment. Draft:Marziyeh Amirizadeh exists as a draft. Assuming that both women are notable, perhaps Draft:Marziyeh Amirizadeh could be added to article space after any necessary improvements are made, and this article could be moved to Maryam Rostamour-Keller (her current name), thereby preserving the edit history. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 08:37, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply
If agreement is that there is enough information to split, I think this is a good idea. Otherwise, I think that Marziyeh Amirizadeh's name be removed from this article per request and this article moved to Maryam Rostamour-Keller per your suggestion. GnocchiFan ( talk) 22:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Split I think it is reasonable to have this specific article deleted. However, I would be open to the thought of having a separate article for Maryam Rostampour if she is notable enough. Marziyeh Amirizadeh on the surface level appears to be a notable figure (I have not done much research into her life though), so I would be more comfortable with having a separate article for her. ❤History Theorist❤ 18:35, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply

A person claiming to be one of the subjects of the article requested that it be deleted because they don't want to be associated with the other person? The title is probably inappropriate and would be more appropriate as something else but this does appear to be a notable event. Traumnovelle ( talk) 22:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note that the editor claiming to be the subject says on the talk page that she paid $300 to have her Wikipedia article written. Is this the current draft, created by an editor who has edited no other topic? Pam D 22:59, 24 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read!
Talk!} 23:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:13, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Iran Proposed deletions

Standardized Patient (via WP:PROD on 29 January 2024)

Iraq

Ammar Kofi

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

Crosswiki spam of a singer of very doubtful notability. Long past the time limit for draftification without a consensus here, and I think deletion would be appropriate. Mccapra ( talk) 21:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Iraq. Mccapra ( talk) 21:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete: This [3] appears to be an interview... It's about all I find. The article now only has one source. Even with the one I found, we still don't have enough for notability. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Israel

Executions and assassinations in the West Bank and Jerusalem

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

the whole article is OR and synth. it starts with Jesus, who is reffered here as "King of Martyrs", then goes to Eichmann, then to Jewish and Palestinian terrorr attacks. The whole article is cherry-picking, and the implied comparison of Jesus, Eichmann, and "The Martyr Abu Ali Mustafa" (sic!) is OR. There are enough articles on the subject ( List of Israeli assassinations, List of Palestinian suicide attacks, etc) and there is no need for another synth one.

and it completely fails NPOV : "An eye for an eye", "King of Martyrs", "he refused to commit sin unto the point of shedding blood", "The Martyr Abu Ali Mustafa", "prominent militant", etc Artem.G ( talk) 13:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Israel, and Palestine. Artem.G ( talk) 13:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete One-sided (fails WP:NPOV) and WP:RECENTISM The Banner talk 14:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete Full of synth, already covered in the many other articles on this topic. Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk) 16:13, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete This article is quite unnecessary and the title errs geographically in addition to the other problems. Selfstudier ( talk) 17:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete per nom, and possibly refer MWQs to WP:AE for disruptive editing in the Israel-Palestine topic area. Walsh90210 ( talk) 23:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete as unnecessary, every section has a "Main article" or "See also". I don't see that NPOV or OR problems are clear. I do see NPOV problems but I don't see them as deliberately pushing a position. The editor is interesting but I'm commenting on what's here. Sammy D III ( talk) 02:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete per all above. gidonb ( talk) 03:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete: This article seems repetitive and leans heavily towards one perspective. The information it covers is already well-established in other articles. Waqar 💬 16:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment. This is not a content fork of List of Israeli assassinations because it covers different events. But it is arguably a WP:COATRACK if one considers it as a regular page. Even the title ("Executions and assassinations") indicates this is a WP:COATRACK. This could be a list page, but the criteria for inclusion are not clear. At the very least, the criteria should be defined and the page fixed. My very best wishes ( talk) 16:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Ami Dar

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

Can't find anything beyond a story in the wrap and a handbook by his organization (which has been deleted). Given the lack of an Israeli page, it seems Israeli sources are unlikely as well. One source is not enough for WP:GNG Allan Nonymous ( talk) 23:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Israel. Shellwood ( talk) 23:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Weak delete: Might be notable, seems to be mentioned in a book: [4], but that is a tertiary source about it. Very brief mention here [5]. Oaktree b ( talk) 00:43, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge into Idealist.org -- which he founded, leads and for which he is known -- as a an unnecessary WP:SPINOFF/ WP:CONTENTFORK, per WP:ATD and WP:CHEAP. Note the huge overlap. gidonb ( talk) 16:41, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Content can't be merged to Idealist.org as this page is a redirect. Is there a different target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read!
Talk!} 23:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Erel Segal

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

Fails WP:JOURNALIST, WP:GNG. No WP:SIGCOV, just dummy articles! Youknowwhoistheman ( talk) 11:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, News media, and Israel. Youknowwhoistheman ( talk) 11:28, 19 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep - a very well known and prominent journalist. The article has over a dozen sources, and I will shortly add more Kentucky Rain24 ( talk) 20:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Kentucky Rain24, can you share your WP:THREE please? Journalists are among the hardest to research. gidonb ( talk) 13:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

this provides an in depth look at Segal's political views and places them in the context of Israeli right wing media, and indicates notability beyond Israeli media
this is a lengthy, in-depth interview dedicated to Segal, in Israel's highest circulation mainstream newspaper. This alone satisfies WP:SIGCOV.
this provides English language coverage of a notable controversy he was involved with, showing notability beyond Israel (DW is a German broadcaster)

Kentucky Rain24 ( talk) 14:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

#2 and #3 are not independent. BuzzFeed isn't very good but the journalist who wrote #1 is. gidonb ( talk) 16:28, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Buzzfeed News is rated "green" and reliable on WP:RSNP. Why you'd think that ynet and deutsche welle are not independent of Segal is beyond me. Kentucky Rain24 ( talk) 16:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

The problem is that these are interviews, quoted content, and shared sexism in a tv-show. Not independent content or SIGCOV. These media are actually good. Buzzfeed is acceptable because of the author. gidonb ( talk) 16:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I think you are misreading the defintion of "independent" - ""Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent."- an interview with Segal is not produced by him but by the paper and journalist interviewing him.

Regardless, while the DW article includes a very short quote from Segal, it is neither an interview nor focused on that quote. Instead, it describes the controversy Segal was involved with, with other 3rd parties commenting about Segal. Kentucky Rain24 ( talk) 17:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

I'll take another look and weigh again how much is independent content about Segal. Not ruling out any conclusion yet. gidonb ( talk) 17:07, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 14:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete: There's coverage that mentions him, such as the DW article, but these aren't about this person. This [6] also mentions him, but just barely as the article talks about his employer. We don't have enough substantial coverage to keep the article Oaktree b ( talk) 03:23, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply
I don't think that "mentions him, but just barely " is a fair assessment of [7] - the article is about an event in which he is the main subject - his employer suspended him for something he did. He is the subject of both the headline and the sub-headline, he is the main topic of the first and second paragraphs ("The Kan public broadcasting corporation on Thursday suspended one of its anchors because he appeared in a video"; "News presenter Erel Segal was suspended, pending further notice, after the video was uploaded to Netanyahu’s Twitter account earlier Thursday."), he is mentioned in the 3rd and 4th paragraphs and is the subject of the 5th, there's a quote from the PM of Israel about him etc... Kentucky Rain24 ( talk) 14:16, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep. A very well-known journalist in Israel, and there are many sources for this. In addition, he is also a writer (2 books) and a musician. (Full disclosure: I wrote the article). HaOfa ( talk) 09:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 14:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Hayley Anne Sacks

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the national championships do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, Israel, and New York. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete: For the same reasons as the last AfD. This subject lacks the WP:SIGCOV from reliable, independent sources to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun ( talk) 13:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect to Israeli Figure Skating Championships, where Sack's achievements, two national silver medals, are recorded. Per CHEAP and ATD. gidonb ( talk) 02:41, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read!
Talk!} 03:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete: Not notable enough based on the competitions she won, or did not win, having placed only silver in the Nationals, then 17th in the World Championships, then nothing more after that. Prof.PMarini ( talk) 07:35, 25 June 2024 (UTC) reply

She won twice silver medals in Israel. I wouldn't discount the huge efforts that go into that with "only" and "nothing more". A redirect is well deserved and as ATD and CHEAP usually takes precedence over delete. gidonb ( talk) 11:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read!
Talk!} 03:45, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

DemoCrisis

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

Fails GNG as well NCORP because it hasn't received sig./in-depth coverage in RS, Fwiw, this article is created by a SPA WillyEaaa Saqib ( talk) 15:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Israel, Europe, Hungary, and Poland. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep: Has been covered in independent reliable periodicals (in depth and directly): Haaretz ( https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-15/ty-article/.premium/this-catastrophe-proves-the-democracy-movements-importance/0000018b-334e-d1bc-a58b-7befc67b0000 https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-03/ty-article/.premium/civil-society-in-israel-poland-and-hungary-team-up-to-defend-democracy/0000018a-f400-d3af-a3ce-f5c215bd0000), The Jerusalem Post (quoted currently in the article). So that it does meet the general requirements for notability. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
- Mushy Yank, Per WP:MULTSOURCES The appearance of different articles in the same newspaper is still one source (one publisher) And even with coverage in The Jerusalem Post , it falls short of meeting the GNG as well WP:SIRS.— Saqib ( talk) 16:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  The Jerusalem Post and Haaretz (choose the article you like best from Haaretz) are not the same periodical. Far from it!:D) - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:34, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  Sorry, how does any of the 3 articles fall(s) short of meeting (....) WP:SIRS? Both newspapers are 1) independent, 2) considered reliable on WP; 3) the coverage is significant and 4) the articles are secondary sources . So why does this movement not meet GNG then? - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:45, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  Mushy Yank, Well, given that the author WillyEaaa has been found engaging in UPE as confirmed here, so I don't even feel the need to argue whether this meets GNG or not. — Saqib ( talk) 16:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
  !!!!!!!!! - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment: For what it's worth, this same author WillyEaaa also created a BLP on Dan Sobovitz, the founder of DemoCrisis, and it was noted that the @WillyEaaa is engaged in UPE, so it's very likely that this article is also a PAID job. Saqib ( talk) 16:37, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
- Courtesy @ Alpha3031: who also flagged this page earlier. — Saqib ( talk) 16:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete: "International" means Europe and Israel in this case. The movement is unknown in North America (and based on the lack of sourcing, I'm assuming everywhere else). The UPE (twice 'round) is another red flag, this is PROMO. There is no sourcing I'd consider about this "group", it appears to be a SYNTH. Oaktree b ( talk) 20:33, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
?? International means across different countries! Yes Poland and Hungary are in Europe and Israel is in the Middle-East, and neither is in America yet. True. But do you have a problem with that? Shall we delete every page related to those regions? Good luck. Ping me when you have a consensus. And "unknown in North America"..... how would you know and how would it matter? Notability is based on significant coverage in reliable sources not on the assumption that no one in North America reads Haaretz or The Jerusalem Post, that are widely considered some of the most notable newspapers in Israel. Lack of sourcing? No sourcing?? Please do read the page and this discussion again.....As for promotional intent, no idea, feel free to correct any phrasing or wording you find inappropriate....- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:23, 13 June 2024 (UTC) (PS..Added article In Politico (:D) with 3 paragraphs on the movement. ....) reply
Correct, sourcing is about various small groups, not about this confederation of groups. This is a European event at this point with Israel stuck on for good measure. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:16, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
I don't understand your comment. 2 major newspapers (+ Politico) cover THIS movement in 3 articles, and it is referred to under its name. What small groups that would not be this confederation are you referring to? In what sources? - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 06:27, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

And I know because I'm in North America, and media here hasn't covered it. See for yourself [8] or [9] and Mexico for good measure [10]. A re-hashed PR item isn't really what we're looking for. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:22, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Oaktree b, I don't see the point of debating whether this meets GNG or not. This article was clearly created in violation of WP's TOU. — Saqib ( talk) 14:10, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Understood, I'm wondering if this AfD could be closed at this point. Oaktree b ( talk) 16:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
No. No. Sorry but the nominator's deliberate lack of response to the issue they themselves raised and commented is at the very least misleading and so is the way they justify their refusal with repeating their comment about potential paid contributions: the COI/Paid contributions issue does not change the fact that we're discussing content here, not investigating behaviour. Sources show the page does not meet deletion for promotional content (if that is what the nominator has in mind, but not sure, as they didn't elaborate any further). Quite the opposite, as it does appear the subject does seem to meet the requirements for notability, see above and below. So, no, the Afd cannot be speedy-closed now, unless nomination is withdrawn and everyone agrees the subject is notable, but I suppose that is not what you had in mind. That would be the only way to allow an early close so far, imv, though. But both nominator and you might know that by now since the nominator has asked this elsewhere, in a discussion where you also were active, so I that should suppose you've read it (:D) and you both probably simply didn't update your comments..... So although this is technically a reply, I am rather mentioning this so that the closer and other users should not waste too much time on that part of the discussion. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Mushy Yank, I suggest you focus this discussion on the article itself, rather than on the nominator. — Saqib ( talk) 20:02, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
That's exactly what I thought I was doing and was only mentioning the nominator's lack of response, to explain that what they had said was misleading. I did so so that other users should indeed not be misled to believe that this discussion was over, that notability was not the issue or that this could be early-closed. Sorry if I gave the nominator the impression that I was focusing on their person. But I thank you all the same for your suggestion and time. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:31, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Saqib ( talk) 20:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment: It appears the "manifesto" (for lack of a better word) was sent out to various media outlets, none of which seem to have picked it up. [11] is all there is, outside of the two sources from Israel. This reads as pretty much a rehashing of the same news/PR item mentioned above. I'm still not seeing notability. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
So, it's not notable on the English Wikipedia because it is "unknown in North America (...) and everywhere else" because American media haven't covered it, and despite the fact that 2 major Israeli newspapers have covered it (one, twice)? OK. That's what I thought. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 06:45, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
The same story in both papers, yes, that's one source. Oaktree b ( talk) 11:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
???? Jerusalem Post= one newspaper, one article. Haaretz=one (very different) newspaper, with two different articles. That's three articles, which, if you wish, you can count as coming from 2 different sources only, but not 1! Add Politico (which was not an Israeli website last time I checked and is owned by an....American group:D), 3 paragraphs. You can turn this the way you want but you cannot count only one source. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:48, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Mushy Yank, OK allow me evaluate the coverage you provided to address your doubts - Haaretz is behind a paywall, so I can't access those articles. However, I've reviewed the coverage from Jerusalem Post and Politico, and both fail to meet the GNG. The Jerusalem Post coverage is based on an interview, which does not qualify as independent coverage. While the Politico coverage is merely a WP:TRIVIALMENTION and does not provide the in-depth, significant coverage needed to establish GNG.You've participated in hundreds of AfDs, so by now you should at the very minimum know that we don't rely on TRIVIALMENTION as well interview-based coverage to establish GNG. Are you purposefully insisting that the article meets GNG, despite it clearly falling short? Well I see it as WP:DISRUPTIVE and WP:TIMESINK, then. Allow me repeat GNG requires strong, independent sourcing that offers in-depth information about the subject and neither of these coverage meets that standard. Feel free to ask if there's anything else you'd like me to clarify, so that you can stop from labeling my nomination as misleading. — Saqib ( talk) 21:02, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
I am not calling your nomination misleading. Your comments about the fact that discussing notability was not needed (and your sudden lack of response to replies I had made to your comments on my !vote and comments) were, as anyone can now verify, but I sincerely don't think that was on purpose, and thanks for clarifying that point. As for your assessment of the sources, I pretty much disagree with everything you say (The JP article is presenting excerpts from an interview only in its second half and Politico has 3 paragraphs on the movement; although the article in Politico is a bit unclear).

Regarding your other comments (disruptive, timesink), allow me to sigh again (the time sink accusation might prove a double-edged sword) but feel free to raise the issue elsewhere, if believing that what I find to be multiple reliable sources offering significant coverage is enough for notability, and daring to !vote accordingly and explain why when my !vote is commented (by you, as it is your habit when a !vote does not go your way) is not allowed when you have decided something is not notable. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:46, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Look I've no interest in raise the issue elsewhere as it doesn't concern me greatly. You've stated your case, I've made mine, so there's no need to prolong this debate. If it's my habit to argue when a !vote does not go my way, it should be yours as well so let's avoid pointing fingers at each other. I leave this discussion to others to decide the fate of an article on a non-notable subject created by a confirmed UPE. See you around! Saqib ( talk) 22:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Whether or not the article creator was/is an SPA or a paid editor doesn't mean an article should be deleted, it's not grounds of deletion. If you believe so, please quote the policy that states this. What matters is whether this article subject meets GNG or NCORP which is based on the quality of the sourcing. If there are factors of the article that can be improved by editing, they should be. Also, an article subject doesn't have to internationally important to be considered notable. Please focus on notability of the subject and existing sources establishing this, not who created the article (unless they are a block-evading sockpuppet).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read!
Talk!} 16:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep. I agree with Mushy_Yank about the validity of the two Ha'aretz, the JPost and the Politico item for WP:NORG, and there is also mildly critical coverage in a Hungarian news magazine. It's not a lot, and I do think it started as overly promotional and could use more balance, but it does clear the threshold set in NORG. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 23:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete clearly fails WP:NORG, along with the UPE concerns. I have no idea how two brief mentions in sentences in the Politico article can be considered SIGCOV, and the other articles are close to press release regurgitations. SportingFlyer T· C 12:11, 23 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:23, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Jordan

Kuwait

Lebanon

Proposed deletions

April 2023 Israel rocket attacks (via WP:PROD on 12 September 2003)

Oman

Palestine

Executions and assassinations in the West Bank and Jerusalem

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

the whole article is OR and synth. it starts with Jesus, who is reffered here as "King of Martyrs", then goes to Eichmann, then to Jewish and Palestinian terrorr attacks. The whole article is cherry-picking, and the implied comparison of Jesus, Eichmann, and "The Martyr Abu Ali Mustafa" (sic!) is OR. There are enough articles on the subject ( List of Israeli assassinations, List of Palestinian suicide attacks, etc) and there is no need for another synth one.

and it completely fails NPOV : "An eye for an eye", "King of Martyrs", "he refused to commit sin unto the point of shedding blood", "The Martyr Abu Ali Mustafa", "prominent militant", etc Artem.G ( talk) 13:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Israel, and Palestine. Artem.G ( talk) 13:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete One-sided (fails WP:NPOV) and WP:RECENTISM The Banner talk 14:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete Full of synth, already covered in the many other articles on this topic. Flemmish Nietzsche ( talk) 16:13, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete This article is quite unnecessary and the title errs geographically in addition to the other problems. Selfstudier ( talk) 17:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete per nom, and possibly refer MWQs to WP:AE for disruptive editing in the Israel-Palestine topic area. Walsh90210 ( talk) 23:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete as unnecessary, every section has a "Main article" or "See also". I don't see that NPOV or OR problems are clear. I do see NPOV problems but I don't see them as deliberately pushing a position. The editor is interesting but I'm commenting on what's here. Sammy D III ( talk) 02:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete per all above. gidonb ( talk) 03:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete: This article seems repetitive and leans heavily towards one perspective. The information it covers is already well-established in other articles. Waqar 💬 16:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment. This is not a content fork of List of Israeli assassinations because it covers different events. But it is arguably a WP:COATRACK if one considers it as a regular page. Even the title ("Executions and assassinations") indicates this is a WP:COATRACK. This could be a list page, but the criteria for inclusion are not clear. At the very least, the criteria should be defined and the page fixed. My very best wishes ( talk) 16:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Islamic Association of Palestine

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

Very obvious WP:POVFORK of Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, spends much of the article talking about the trial and the same people from a very biased POV. Not certain if there are notable differences from the HLF article User:Sawerchessread ( talk) 19:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Some Info:

Initial Merge Discussion

I've been trying to solicit advice about Islamic Association of Palestine and merging it into Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. I don't want to force a WP:SILENCE on this, as I assume this may be contentious and relate to WP:ARBPIA, but it seemed noone was interested in a merge discussion after a month.

Information about the trial

The IAP article is a POVFork about the same trial as the HLF, with the same individuals and facts of the trial, and the original version of the article IAP last month went really deep into various conspirary theories linking IAP to every other Muslim organization in some grand "Jihad" terrorist ring. Particularly egregiously, the support for the conspiracy theory was from a source that was attempting to debunk it. The sourcing for HistoryCommons.org is a deadlink. And a source from Matthew Levitt is used more than ten times to make up most of this article, a person from the very pro-Israeli Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and a key witness for the trial. Relying so heavily on sourcing that is intrinsically related to the trial seems like a good argument to suggest this is an article about the HLF trial and not the IAP as an organization.

Information about what the IAP

I can't seem to find anything specific about the IAP from a lot of searches that doesn't immediately reference the HLF trial, and some of the sourcing on this that seemed to talk more specifically about the IAP is from deadlinks. If the only thing notable about the IAP is the HLF trial, then the article should be just merged into the HLF trial page.

I cleaned up some of it, but there is not enough differences between the two versions I think to justify making a new article.

The HLF article makes more sense and seems more objective without having to go full " Civilization Jihad." User:Sawerchessread ( talk) 19:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 22. — ^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:24, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 22:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep. Not seeing how it's a purported POVFORK. Per sources, the Islamic Association of Palestine is a separate organization from the Holy Land Foundation, so they should not be in the same article. An editor's perception of bias is not a reason for AfD, which is determined by coverage in WP:RS. Levvitt is a scholar and reliable source. Affiliation with an organization perceived as bias does not affect whether the source is credible and a reliable source of facts. Lots of coverage in source across the ideological spectrum that clearly establishes WP:GNG:
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
Significant coverage in scholarly work The Muslim Brotherhood and the West by scholar Martyn Frampton and published by Harvard University Press
[16] in scholarly work by scholars Thomas. M. Pick, Anne Speckhard, and Beatrice Jacuch. Longhornsg ( talk) 23:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply
First article seems fine.

Second, third, fourth article is about the HLF trial.

Fifth source mentions IAP for one paragraph, and includes HLF.

6th source uses a scratch note from one Muslim Brotherhood guy that was never accepted by any other muslim brotherhood. This 1991 note became the basis for the Civilization Jihad conspiracy theory in the 2000s to 2010s.

matthew Levitt was the key witness for HLF trial, and his work is entirely about proving financial connections between groups. His writings are about the holy land 5.

i argue that if this article is mostly about the trial to convict the 5, and the IAP is not sufficiently notable by itself except in context of the trial, it should be merged (maybe keep as a subsection in HLF what it did). User:Sawerchessread ( talk) 23:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply
I'd argue that a passing mention (one word mention) in three of these sources also suggests it is a passing reference as part of discussion for the HLF trial.

I want to find more sourcing beyond the HLF trial and its repercussions, that there is enough info besides just the HLF trial to suggest it warrants an article User:Sawerchessread ( talk) 23:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply

That Matthew Levitt source is used 11 times throughout this article, when in the Holy Land article, his sourcing is used only once suggests a POV Fork.

A review of his work on NYTimes

"Similarly, to judge from his acknowledgements and his notes, Levitt depends heavily on analyses from the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center of the Center for Special Studies — an Israeli nongovernmental organization created "in memory of the fallen of the Israeli intelligence community" and staffed by its former employees... None of this would matter if Levitt used the center's analyses critically, but he doesn't appear to. As a result, there will be readers of this book who will see it as fronting for the Israeli intelligence establishment and its views."

Not arguing he's not academic, just biased (As is every source on Israel/palestine), and that citing him heavily about the trial and the evidence tying the defendents together in one article, and not citing heavily in another suggests a POV fork. User:Sawerchessread ( talk) 23:39, 29 June 2024 (UTC) reply
So add more sources. This is not what a WP:POVFORK is. Longhornsg ( talk) 04:10, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep. The Islamic Association of Palestine is a different organization from the Holy Land Foundation. How is this a POV fork of the Holy Land Foundation - the article does not exclusively rely on Levitt's writings, directly cites an FBI report, and refers to a different organization from the HLF. Both were convicted of providing material support for terrorism and were proven to be fundraising arms for Hamas, alongside the Quranic Literacy Institute. All three organizations are notable as per the general notability guideline as per the sources Longhornsg provided. This article could easily be repaired by bringing in sources from the other two articles about the Holy Land Foundation case, so that the article is not largely reliant on Levitt, given possible concerns of bias. In order for something to be a POV fork, it must be on the same topic as another article. The Holy Land Foundation article is about the Holy Land Foundation, whereas this article is about the Islamic Association of Palestine.
TL;DR: No, this is not a POV fork because it simply isn't on the same topic as the Holy Land Foundation article and the Islamic Association of Palestine clearly meets WP:GNG. » PKMNLives 🖛 Talk 04:25, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
It discusses the same trial to the same five men for 95% of the article. The suggestion to bring it into line by including sourcing from the other article would be to keep discussing the trial.

There is not enough about the organization by itself, outside of the context of the trial, and it is not notable except as part of the HLF trial. User:Sawerchessread ( talk) 04:30, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Deletion Review

Proposed deletions

Templates

Redirects

</noinclude>

Qatar

Saudi Arabia

AfD debates

Riyadh School of Tourism and Hospitality

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

Stub about a proposed future institute based entirely on PR. I don’t think this organisation is yet notable. Mccapra ( talk) 21:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism, Education, and Saudi Arabia. Mccapra ( talk) 21:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:43, 4 July 2024 (UTC) reply

2024 Sakhir Formula 3 round

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

Having checked through per WP:BEFORE, significant coverages ( WP:SIGCOV) are rather poor for most 2nd and below tier formula classes given the reason for this nominations. Sources consists of almost entirely of WP:PRIMARY. Additionally, Wikipedia is not a sportsheet for the most ardent of fans ( WP:NOTSTATS), whom anything less than first tier formula classes appeals to. WP:AFD will be a redirect or merge to 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship (edit) and 2024 FIA Formula 2 Championship.

I am also nominating the following related pages for this same reason with more to be added in:

Further additions for this same reason above):

SpacedFarmer ( talk) 19:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 19:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:57, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bahrain-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 20:02, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep all - It's standard practice to routinely split out individual races from their parent (season) article. This keeps the parent article (in this case 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship) readable. Your suggestion to merge, while also being a full admittance that there is notable content here, would cause the parent article to be far too cluttered. WP:SIZESPLIT and WP:NOMERGE once again apply here. ~~"...whom anything less than first tier formula classes appeals to." That is your personal opinion and one which quite obviously has a lot of disagreement.~~ ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 23:21, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Furthermore, suggesting 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship as an ATD for the F2 races you bundled in is pure nonsense. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 23:24, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
- What about WP:NOTSTATS? 5225_C ( talk • contributions) 05:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  "Where statistics are so lengthy as to impede the readability of the article, the statistics can be split into a separate article and summarized in the main article. (e.g., statistics from the main article 2012 United States presidential election were moved to a related article Nationwide opinion polling for the 2012 United States presidential election)." This language seems to support the splitting of these individual races. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 07:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  I wouldn't have minded them to exist if reliable third party sources exists to back them up, but no, we get sources consisting of mainly WP:PRIMARY or nothing and do we need an WP:INDISCRIMINATE amount of sports results to clutter Wikipedia with, especially those the most ardent minority of nerds bother with. There's always a home for them in Fandom. Nothing wrong with that site, though. People should think before shoving junk into Wikipedia. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 14:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  But you're not understanding that these are not standalone articles; their notability is established through sources which exist in the main article including Formula Scout and Autosport. The personal aspects of your rationale also really needs to stop, posthaste. Personal attacks like calling people "nerds" and calling their efforts "junk" are part of what got you sent to ANI before. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 15:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  Wow, such snowflakes like the modern times, getting upset by words like 'nerds', I thought nerds like being called nerds. I was a car nerd at one time and am not ashamed of that label. I call 'efforts' like this junk because people write crap. Worse is that there is no source. Is this the standards Wikipedia is heading to?
  
  "their notability is established through sources which exist in the main article including Formula Scout and Autosport" ...and not much else as checked WP:BEFORE. So 3 sources make a subject notable per WP:SIGCOV. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 19:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  
  The statistics "split off" (they weren't split, these article were created separately) are not actually significant. The only significant results of feeder series are the championship results, which are already included on the relevant season article. 5225_C ( talk • contributions) 00:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
  "(they weren't split, ...)" - Yes they were; the initial versions of these pages were redirects to the main article created by MaxLikesStuff, created out of WP:REDLINKS at the redirect target. Radioactive39 then converted these redirects into sub-articles in order to add content rather than add it to the main article and clutter it up. The stats in these sub-articles are summarized in the main article. There is nothing in NOTSTATS which indicates that these sub-articles are in violation of it. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 04:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Saudi Arabia, France, Italy, Spain, and Australia. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 23:23, 30 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Formula One is the top tier of the sport and one of the (if not the single) most prestigious category in motorsport as a whole. The F1 equivalent pages to the ones included in this nomination, using this article as an example, contain little more additional information. Reading WP:NOTSTATS, the only thing these pages are missing is a little more summarised information. The nominated pages display the information in clear, concise tables and they provide information that is not available in the main season articles ( 2024 Formula 2 Championship and 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship) and add context to the relevant motorsport championship. Romero13 ( talk) 10:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Fandom are always there for fans like you. SpacedFarmer ( talk) 14:05, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep per above discussion. These are not standalone articles — if you nominate these few you should go all the way back to 2004 and list all rounds of previous F3000, GP2, Formula 2, GP3 and Formula 3 seasons. But as much as some lack sufficient prose, all are notable individually and WP:SECONDARY coverage exists. Nominator also gets a WP:TROUT for their uncivil comments. MSport1005 ( talk) 18:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
"But as much as some lack sufficient prose..." I noticed that 2024 FIA Formula 3 Championship does have summaries of the races in its prose, in line with the above-quoted section of WP:NOTSTATS which I opine supports our keep !votes. This is the exact standard which I believe we strive for on Wikipedia as a whole; SUMMARY-style prose in the main article, stats tables split out into their own sub-articles. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 18:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC) reply
- Sounds good to me. They aren't independently after all. 5225_C ( talk • contributions) 00:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep. As mentioned above, these articles may not have any prose, but they have been a staple of the site for years, with GP2 and GP3 having had their individual race articles.

Abdullah Al-Jumah

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

I couldn't find out if this person, a Saudi author is notable as per WP:GNG. Duke of New Gwynedd ( talk | contrib.) 08:43, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Law, Travel and tourism, and Saudi Arabia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Articles with proposed deletion tags

Syria

Turkey

2024 Gazi University protests

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

WP:NOTNEWS, non Wiki worthy news event only covered by Turkish media. Creator has a history of pro-Kurdish agenda editing and creation of articles generally negative of Turkey, and Turkish government Ecrusized ( talk) 22:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 22:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge with Israel–Hamas war protests: No lasting coverage. WP:NOTNEWS. Perhaps, this and the other related article could also be merged to form Israel–Hamas war protests in Turkey. Aintabli ( talk) 09:13, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

2024 Beyoğlu protests

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

WP:NOTNEWS, non Wiki worthy news event only covered by Turkish media. Creator has a history of pro-Kurdish agenda editing and creation of articles generally negative of Turkey, and Turkish government. Ecrusized ( talk) 22:23, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 22:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Merge with Israel–Hamas war protests: No lasting coverage. Aintabli ( talk) 09:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply
One additional idea: This and the other related article could be merged to form Israel–Hamas war protests in Turkey. Aintabli ( talk) 09:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply
This actually seems reasonable. Ilamxan ( talk) 11:02, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Others

United Arab Emirates

Yemen

Middle East

Country deletion sorting

Bahrain

Bahrain Proposed deletions

Egypt

Egypt Proposed deletions

Iran

Iran Proposed deletions

Iraq

Israel

Jordan

Kuwait

Lebanon

Proposed deletions

Oman

Palestine

Deletion Review

Proposed deletions

Templates

Categories

Redirects

Qatar

Saudi Arabia

AfD debates

Articles with proposed deletion tags

Syria

Turkey

Others

United Arab Emirates

Yemen