Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-Hajj Samer Mohamad Bazzi


 * 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 of the debate was delete Jtkiefer T  01:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Al-Hajj Samer Mohamad Bazzi
Non-notable. Only 102 Google hits. The page is also a collection of linkspam. --Khoikhoi 00:51, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom.    Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  02:04, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom Tom Harrison (talk) 03:22, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, possibly a vanity page. --Thephotoman 06:55, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, it is a vanity page, and an article on this chap's organisation (also by him) has already been deleted. Articles_for_deletion/Bay_Area_Shiite-Muslims_Association. --Squiddy 11:13, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Pepsidrinka 19:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Vanity page by a linkspammer. Well, he's stopped linkspamming, so far as I know, but still ... Zora 10:24, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it This is not a vanity page. There are no links to it.  It is not advertised.  It is harmless.  It is not a link spam as it is about a person.  There are people inquiring about this person because of his positions.  This page tells a little bit about this person.  In fact, this is the purpose of wikipedia: provide info about things!  Besides, why are you so eager to delete something harmless?? (unsigned -- from user Sambazzi (subject of article))


 * Please read carefully: "If an article is repeatedly re-created by unassociated editors after being deleted, this may be evidence of a need for an article. Conversely, if an article is repeatedly nominated for deletion, this is not in and of itself evidence that it should be deleted. In some cases, repeated attempts to have an article deleted may even be considered disruptive. If in doubt, don't delete." (unsigned -- from user Sambazzi (subject of article))


 * Some of the people involved here with Wikipedia are most certainly "elitists," rude, bitter, hostile, and inauthentic, especially those who choose to label others or break the very policies of Wikipedia. According to the Wikipedia policy: "New contributors are prospective "members" and are therefore our most valuable resource. We must treat newcomers with kindness and patience — nothing scares potentially valuable contributors away faster than hostility or elitism. While many newcomers hit the ground running, some lack knowledge about the way we do things." (unsigned -- from user Sambazzi (subject of article))


 * Ok, but now you know that you can't write articles about yourself unless you're notable enough. --Khoikhoi 18:01, 22 December 2005 (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.