User talk:Shritwod/Ayman Ahmed El-Difrawi (draft)

This username was created simply to smear Ayman El-Difrawi since a similar posting was removed by WikiPedia.


 * Please note that this page was allowed after the AfD for Ayman Ahmed El-Difrawi to allow editors to attempt to meet the requirements for Notability and provide less Original research. This user page is allowed. You should not blank or delete user pages. You have repeatedly been warned about vandalism and you should also consider this a warning. I will add to your warning on your talk page --SaltyDawg 18:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The main page was remoted for non-notability, not because of inaccuracy. There are lots of links to primary sources here, but if you see something that is nonfactual then constructive edits are welcome. Shritwod 11:10, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * This page was once again blanked by a new IP address 70.121.30.137 who has also vandalized the entry on Les Henderson. this is the same pattern of behavior as the IP address that was blocked yesterday, which leads me to believe it is the same person or group of persons affiliated with El-Difrawi. I am posting a warning on the user page. --SaltyDawg 13:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * This page is not about Ashraf El-Difrawi. Perhaps of interest as a background note only, if he is a notable character in his own right then perhaps more detailed information can be made under another entry. Shritwod (talk) 13:47, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Ash is interesting here because he is Ayman's brother and involved with Shearson that landed Ayman in federal prison and Erickson agency which was a modeling comany. while a protracted entry about him here is inappropriate, a couple of sentences probably are warranted.--192.223.243.6 (talk) 14:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Re-adding this page
I think this page should be re-added soon after some edits to remove some of the original research. In fact, I believe the page never should have been deleted. Some of the previous arguments against notability were 100& bogus per WP:ATA. There are suitable and multiple independent secondary sources here (the main criteria for establishing notability). The argument against notability is made moot by the inclusion of independent sources. According to ATA, the opionions of newspaper editors to include a subject trumps the personal opinions of Wikipedia editors.--SaltyDawg 21:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * As of this posting, this article has 27 citations from independent secendary sources and 40+ from primary sources. Sources include the Washington Post, LA Times, and other very well respected sources. I sincerely believe that notability has been well established. I know some cleanup has to eliminate the original research, but this is not the reason to delete the article. I am going to ask that the article be reinstated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SaltyDawg (talk • contribs) 15:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)