Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-Zain Sabah Al-Naser Al-Sabah


 * 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. Note that this can be recreated if it is neutrally written and is shown to meet WP:BIO.  Sandstein  09:25, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Al-Zain Sabah Al-Naser Al-Sabah

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a filmmaker, written far too much like an advertisement rather than an encyclopedia article and relying far too heavily on primary source verification of her existence rather than reliably sourced evidence of notability. And even the one or two sources here that are more legitimate than the rest still mostly just glancingly namecheck her existence rather than being substantively about her; there's just one source here that's both substantive and reliable enough to count for anything toward WP:GNG, and one source isn't enough to pass GNG by itself. None of Wikipedia's notability criteria for people ever entitle anybody to keep a poorly-sourced and PR-toned profile just because they exist — they must be the subject of coverage in reliable sources to become eligible for an article. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 00:42, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete by all means as I actually tagged this not long after it was started and there isn't even anything to currently suggest minimal general notability. SwisterTwister   talk  08:11, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. Participants might want to review earlier versions of the article as the nominator removed several links to sources just before making the nomination - but on the other hand, they may not want to bother as most of the removed sources seem to have been inappropriately used and poor enough that their removal may even have improved the article. More to the point in this discussion, the tone of previous contributions may have been sufficiently influenced by the undoubted promotionality of the current article as to be somewhat more dismissive of the possibility of notability from other sources than is really justified. There seem to be quite a few reliable sources that at least mention the subject, particularly if one uses a short version of her name - most of these, admittedly, seem to be fairly unsubstantial, often being routine announcements made by her in her current second- or third-level government appointment, but the combination of being a woman in a political position in an Arabian emirate, together with her close relationship to the current Emir of Kuwait, may well have generated something deeper that I have overlooked. Such sources, though, could well be in Arabic, which I can not read at all, and probably need to be searched for by an Arabic-speaker, if there is one currently around. PWilkinson (talk) 01:06, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't remove any links to sources, just for the record. I removed WP:ELNO violations, which isn't the same thing — a company that's named in the article doesn't get to have its name offlinked to its own website as a substitute for a Wikipedia article about that company, for example. And every single link I removed from the running body text as an ELNO violation was just a repetition of a link that still appears in the references section as a footnote anyway. Bearcat (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Question Is her Kuwaiti government appointment high enough to make her notable?John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:00, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - In response to Johnpacklambert's question - no, I don't believe that the undersecretary is by itself establishing notability. Regarding the article, delete per nom and above editors. Poorly sourced, highly promotional.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:14, 21 December 2015 (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.