Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdul-Sattar al-Badri


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 16:28, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Abdul-Sattar al-Badri

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

BLP is sourced to a personal blog. A search of Google News, Google Books, JSTOR, and newspapers.com fails to find any mentions. Chetsford (talk) 16:09, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

"Some news outlets host interactive columns they call "blogs", and these may be acceptable as sources if the writers are professional journalists or professionals in the field on which they write, and the blog is subject to the news outlet's full editorial control. Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications." What you describe as a "personal blog" is in fact written by a prominent academic. Unfortunately that is the only source available in the English language, lack of sources does not prove lack of notability. One source is sufficient to establish notability.Kuching7102 (talk) 21:43, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep According to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Self-published_sources_.28online_and_paper.29
 * If there are non-English sources, they should be added. An article cannot logically pass GNG if the subject of the article can be shown to exist nowhere except on one blog, whether it's written by a qualified person or not. Nor is your personal testament that sources exist somewhere a substitute for the actual presentation of those sources. Chetsford (talk) 21:49, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't see why one source, which we have established is written by a noted academic, should not suffice. There is no requirement to have more than one source, though it is certainly preferable. As it happens I cannot find any good sources in Arabic, the best mention of him there is on a open forum. Maybe you'd like to look for others.Kuching7102 (talk) 22:25, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I found a source mentioning the subject in relation to his contribution to the building of a mosque in Diyala, Iraq. https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ar&u=http://www.masajediraq.com/index.php%3Ftype%3Dprevmas%26idm%3D1295&prev=search. With us now having two sources I think we have established a sufficient level of notability.Kuching7102 (talk) 23:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The masajediraq.com website is not a WP:RS. The standards for WP:BLP are high and a person for whom the most basic biographical data can only be found on a blog with no editorial gatekeeping (and nowhere else) should be free of being subjected to a WP article about him/her. Proving the mere existence of a person or thing does not establish that person or thing's suitability for a WP article. Chetsford (talk) 00:27, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Why on earth should a website about mosques in Iraq, established since 2008, not be a reliable source? Because the website is shoddily formatted and in Arabic? That doesn't take away from its content. The site states: "The mosque Foundation (waqaf) was established in 1979 by the efforts of Sheikh Abdul Sattar Al-Badri Al-Husseini and funded by Al-Haj Alawi Al-Badri Al-Husseini, he donated the piece of land and what is needed for survival, he donated a large sum along with numerous benefactors according to their capacity and he opened the mosque in the same year."
 * That is a non-trivial paragraph clearly establishing the subject as a notable person in his field. Kuching7102 (talk) 04:00, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You can find out more about identifying reliable sources here: WP:RELIABLE. Thanks. Chetsford (talk) 04:20, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete The notion of notavbility is that a person is widely studied. The idea behind reliable sources is not that being written by an academic makes something reliable, but that the multi-step process of vetting and caring involved in academic publishing shows notability. Blogs are a dime a dozen, and mention on one blog somewhere never shows someone as notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:25, 10 November 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kagundu  Talk To Me  01:42, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Virtually no valid sources, most Google queries redirect back to this article. Does not meet WP:BIO.  Nik ol ai Ho ☎️ 04:03, 21 November 2017 (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.