Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abu l-Hasan Ali I


 * 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 keep. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America1000 10:29, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Abu l-Hasan Ali I

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete: as unsourced bio; Google search does not indicate any independemtly reliable sources (i.e. non-mirror sites, Wikia) re subject, although name is confusingly similar to several other individuals of same rank. Quis separabit? 18:47, 22 February 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:06, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:06, 4 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - Essentially unsourced Historical Biography; I am unable to find reliable sources on the subject either. --Jack Frost (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Also known as Ali Pasha and Ali Bey I, this individual satisfies GNG, ANYBIO, and NPOL. I don't find this individual under any other name on wikipedia. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. I will note it has been referenced by User:Simongraham, so it is unlikely to be a hoax, and otherwise he seems like a notable historical figure. Would User:Rms125a@hotmail.com and -User:Jack Frost like to reconsider their opinions now? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:41, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't believe I called it a "hoax". If the article is improved I will, however, reconsider. Quis separabit?  02:41, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: References were added to the article after it was nominated for deletion.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:57, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as it is now sourced and meets GNG.--Bkwillwm (talk) 04:46, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep He was a political leader and a near sovereign, he was clearly notable. We have sources now, so it is clearly not a hoax.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:40, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Obvious keep -- Technically he was not a sovereign ruler, since he owed allegiance to the Ottoman sultan, but for practical purposes he was in the nature of a king. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:32, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Very obviously as ruler of a significant entity. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:51, 15 March 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.