Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdulhadi Najjar


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Abdulhadi Najjar

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm a little bit unsure whether to call this person notable, so I would like to gain some concensus. The article states that he has published many articles on environmental issues, but the publication does not have an article on Wikipedia. There are no other claims of significance or notability in the article. Usually, I would CSD an article like this, but it appears to have been written following the MoS. I'd like to hear some views on this one. Osarius - Want a chat? 20:18, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep as the publication has an article in the Arabic Wikipedia which states that this publication is the the first and the leading environment magazin in the Arab world. the publication, Environment & Development Magazine, page on Facebook is liked by +591,000 people compared with +98,000 people like the page of the Arabic edition of Nature Magazine. If you check the Arabic Wikipedia you will find about 335,000 articles which doesn't mean that the publications or persons listed in English Wikipedia, and not listed in the Arabic one, are not noteworthy. This unsigned comment was added by Abdulhadi.Najjar (talk) on 21:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep because the person's awards mentioned in the infobox of the article are notable and they are well referenced. This unsigned comment was added by Abdulhadi.Najjar (talk) on 21:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually not, see my comments below. --Bejnar (talk) 16:04, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep as it could be more suitable to find sources about the person in his original Arabic name عبد الهادي النجار rather than the English name:
 * This unsigned comment was added by Abdulhadi.Najjar (talk) on 22:31, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Sidenote: The article was created by a user with the same name as the article's subject. Osarius - Want a chat? 20:20, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep because this does not mean that the information listed in the article are not valid as long as they are well referenced and subjective. This unsigned comment was added by Abdulhadi.Najjar (talk) on 21:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete for lack of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. He fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTEBLP and WP:ACADEMIC.  The Environment and Development magazine may be a perfectly reliable source, but it does not provide substantial coverage of Abdulhadi Najjar.  His page there merely lists the article that he has written for them. The UN Habitat Dubai International Award for Best Practices may be a nice award but it is not at the level that usually accords notability by itself, and it is not veriable that he won it. None of the arguments stated above really involve Wikipedia guidelines on notability. Yes the project of the UN Habitat Dubai is verifiably in Homs and belongs to the Homs City Council, and Abdulhadi Najjar was the contact person, it is not clear that Abdulhadi Najjar won any award. The Ford Foundation award is not verifiable.  The article says without indicating a source that the Ford award was a grant to the ""Environment News Website".  It is not clear what the relationship between that newsletter and Abdulhadi Najjar might be.  In all no reliable sources substantively about Abdulhadi Najjar are available. No awards are verifiable.  --Bejnar (talk) 03:35, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete The main reason is that all of the edits of the content were done by User:Abdulhadi.Najjar. Unless this is a name as common as "John Smith" in the US, then this article is the result of a clear Conflict of Interest. There are other reasons as well: the fact that the journal is well known does not mean that any author who publishes in the journal is notable; the article has also been marked as a copyright violation. It seems that this could have qualified for speedy delete. I also concur with the statements of Bejnar. LaMona (talk) 20:25, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:ATD as the article is a stub. I am improving WP:IMPROVE the article taking into consideration all above mentioned worries, and the references in Arabic language. --J.Domna (talk) 00:39, 2 October 2014 (UTC) — J.Domna (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * This may take more than one edit so bear with me. This comment addresses three of the citations that were added by SPA editor J.Domna.  The first was added to substantiate the Ford Foundation award, namely http://wraqat.typepad.com/4eco/2004/12/__5.html.  This cites the environmental newsletter that Abdulhadi Najjar founded and works for.  It is not independent. It is a press release about the grant from the Ford Foundation and it does not mention Abdulhadi Najjar at all. The second citation also goes to the Ford Foundation grant http://www.wam.ae/en/news/international/1395227543892.html. It is an article about the thirteen 2005 Ford Conservation and Environmental Grants given in the Middle-East. It has a single entry that is potentially relevant here, the complete entry is: "Grant awarded: US$5,000, to Environment News Website, submitted by Abdul Hadi Al Najjar, Homs, Syria, in the category of Environmental Education." That provides verification of the grant to the publication, not to a person, but it does not provided any substantial coverage of Abdulhadi_Najjar. The third citation is to the Riyadh News Forum.  It is primarily about the Egyptian environmental editor Khaled Ghanem.  It mentions Abdulhadi Najjar in two sentences, the first where it compares Khaled Ghanem and Abdulhadi Najjar; and the second where it states that Khaled Ghanem see Abdulhadi Najjar not as a compeditor but as a colleage. Again not substantive.--Bejnar (talk) 05:01, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - I'm not sure what the claim to notability is here, but the English language sources sure aren't providing it. If there are Arabic sources that establish notability, we don't have that in the article (at least not enough to meet WP:CREATIVE). 's comments cover everything else. --Tgeairn (talk) 00:42, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr  \ talk / 04:43, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: Multiple "keep" lines by User:Abdulhadi.Najjar struck out above. AllyD (talk) 07:21, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bejnar.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment 's comment related to the The third citation to the Riyadh News Forum delivers unbalanced impression. This could be related to language dificulties as the source is in Arabic language. I am quoting from the Arabic source (The main motivation of Najjar to develop this site is to prove that Arabic environmental education would include a successful trial carried out by one person through internet as a positive sample should be introduced to many environment and media institutions that are not active to provide useful services for the readers claiming that they do not have sufficient financial, human, and infrastructural resources. In fact, after one year, this site is a certificate of a great achievement for this ambitious one-man's efforts.) It is quite clear, in the Arabic texts, that Mr. Najjar's work is independent from Mr. Ghanem's works.J.Domna (talk) 11:59, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


 * The two Arabic sentences quoted are in the context of Khaled Ghanem's web site. and discuss Ghanam's motivation. They read in full (not the abridged version above): وقد كان الدافع الرئيسي للنجار في تطوير هذا الموقع هو إثبات أن العمل الإعلامي البيئي العربي يمكن أن يتضمن تجربة ناجحة يقوم بها شخص واحد عبر الإنترنت كنموذج ايجابي يتم تقديمه للكثير من المؤسسات البيئية والإعلامية التي تتقاعس عن تقديم خدمات مفيدة للقراء إما بحجة نقص التمويل أو نقص الكوادر والبنى التحتية. وبالفعل فإن الموقع يشكل حاليا وبعد سنة من إطلاقه الرسمي شهادة إنجاز كبيرة لهذا الجهد الفردي الطموح، والذي كافأته مؤسسة فورد مؤخرا بواحدة من جوائزها البيئية البسيطة على سبيل الدعم والتقدير.لمية. You be the judge whether it is a passing mention or not. --Bejnar (talk) 16:32, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


 * No. These sentences discuss Mr. Najjar's motivation not Mr. Ghanem's one as you stated. These words الدافع الرئيسي للنجار are translated as Najjar's main motivation. (Ghanem's main motivation) are written in Arabic like this (الدافع الرئيسي لغانم). With due respect, I am a native Arabic speaker and I can judge Arabic very well. Yet, it is a great effort that Bejnar was able to extract the exact translated text from its Arabic origin.J.Domna (talk) 17:15, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note for the users of Google Translate service: Najjar (نجار) is translated from Arabic to English as Carpenter according to its meaning in Arabic. J.Domna (talk) 17:35, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete: Even if taken together, the sources listed above don't provide much of a basis for creating a coherent article, and fall far short of establishing notability in accordance with our guidelines. Too run-of-the-mill for inclusion here. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 14:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Call to reevaluate the article itself upon improvement WP:IMPROVE as most of the above mentioned concerns were solved, from my point of view, including notability WP:NOTEBLP, independent sources, and creativity WP:CREATIVE. J.Domna (talk) 19:30, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for all of the effort you have put into improving the article. However, having re-reviewed the article and sources, I must reaffirm my delete recommendation (already listed above). There is just not enough here to establish notability under our guidelines. Tgeairn (talk) 00:17, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I have to concur. In spite of the recent changes, there still is not nearly enough reliably sourced information to build an article and to establish notability, so I also reaffirm my delete !vote. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 19:12, 12 October 2014 (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.