Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaidh ibn Abdullah al-Qarni


 * 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   no consensus.  MBisanz  talk 01:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Aaidh ibn Abdullah al-Qarni

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The guy lacks relevance. Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 19:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak delete He has received some coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. That coverage is not significant enough to warrant an article though:
 * Major islamic book order websites such as onlinislamicstore.com and islamic books direct.co.uk stock his books. However this is only trivial coverage.
 * The book "Don't be sad" is ranked #433,053 on Amazon, so evidently they aren't best sellers.
 * The only news article he's ever been mentioned in is this one in Malaysia Today. That was a trivial mention an does not establish notability. ANd even if it was non-trivial Malaysia Today is little more than a news blog.
 * Patton t / c 19:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. At least one of his books, "Don't be Sad", appears to be notable.  Review here: ; discussion in an academic paper here: Bernard Haykel, "The Islamic Book Market," In The Index on Censorship, pp. 192-96.  I expect there to be many more suitable sources available to speakers of Arabic. JulesH (talk) 19:39, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "Don't be sad" is notable, and I would like to see an article on it, however, notability is not inherited, and this author does not meet the notability guidelines for authors.-- Patton t / c 19:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * He does he meets the criterion: "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Creating a notable work of fiction is exactly what this point is supposed to cover. We generally delete albums if we don't have an article for the group that made it, so why would we write articles about notable books without covering the person who wrote it. - Mgm|(talk) 13:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * delete Does not appear to satisfy notability requirements. Edison (talk) 23:09, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * keep though with the sources immediately available it's relatively hard to tell. An author of multiple books, of which at least one is notable, is notable. In doubt, we should go with it being  the author who's notable, for there are likely to be more books. It's only when there is literally only a single published book that the book might be notable but not the author. DGG (talk) 06:14, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep or rename to La Tahzan (Don't be sad). This book is notable, 1 and is cited by different Muslim websites and bookstores, 2. Also, the book has been translated to Spanish, 3 --Jmundo (talk) 18:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per the comment above I made in response to Patton123. - Mgm|(talk) 13:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom ♣ Princess  Clown  ♥ 01:29, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.