Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Hallak (2nd nomination)


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:01, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Al Hallak
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable film director. Still no in-depth coverage could be found. This should be salted as well. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 22:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:59, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete for the same reasons I outlined at the earlier AfD. From memory, this present incarnation of the article has less information about the subject even than the earlier puff-piece had. Salting wouldn't be a bad idea, either. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:14, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete The situation has not changed at all since earlier this year when this last came up for deletion discussion. He still has not made any significant work as a filmmaker, and his work has not as a whole contributed long term to the body of thought. Academics do not become notable for their thesis, generally not even if they rework it into a published book (which a great many do, at least in the field of history, with which I am most familiar with), and filmmakers do not generally become notable for their thesis either.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:52, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep he is a recognized filmmaker of the month by the D.C. Film Office, made major VR Sci-Fi perfect that was featured in the Huff Post. He served as a judge at major film festivals such as Washington West Film Festival. — JackSwan (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * The "major project" you mention doesn't seem to have an awful lot of coverage outside of the source provided, and being "filmmaker of the month" doesn't strike me as an overly major claim to notability - I was "employee of the month" a couple of times in my old job, but it doesn't earn me an article. Why not re-create the article once he is notable, rather than a few months after consensus had been that he isn't? BigHaz - Schreit mich an 06:23, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hallak has served as faculty member at the New York Film Academy in Los Angeles where he supervised thesis film projects at the MFA in Filmmaking Program. He served as a judge at a major film festival, giving him an honor as an industry professional and recognized filmmaker. His "Major Project" was featured on veer.tv as well.
 * Just a quick suggestion going forward: in AfD discussions, it's generally a good thing to "sign" your posts. Just type the "tilde" character (~) four times at the end of your comment, and it will include your name, a link to your Talk page and the time you left the comment. To respond to the substance of your comments - the featuring on Veer.TV looks more like just an upload to that particular site, much in the way that you or I could upload videos to YouTube or elsewhere if we wanted to. In relation to his position as an academic, he would need to meet one or more of the criteria here, unless he meets the general notability guideline. Simply being a faculty member doesn't get him anywhere near over the line, I'm afraid. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 06:58, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * He was featured on Veer, meaning his project 'Project Gordon' was selected to be on the front page, just like Vimeo has staff picks. Not every faculty supervises final thesis projects of the MFA in filmmaking, those movies are screened at WB, that gives him credibility. CGBros normally doesn't feature any project, his Sci-Fi project 'The Paradigm' 2014 was featured on CGBros and several major sites, I believe that is a recognition for his quality of work. he was selected to judge a major film festival that is presented by Boeing. Maybe he doesn't have enough publicity, I agree, he should hire a manger or publicist, but that doesn't mean he should not be recognized for his work JackSwan (talk) 07:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It's not a case of "how much publicity does he have?" It's a case of "is he notable?" If he's attracted multiple instances of non-trivial coverage in reliable sources independent of the man himself, the answer to that second question is "yes", and he gets an article. In this instance, he doesn't seem to have done so as yet. I'm sure he's a terrific person, an up-and-coming talent and one to watch out for in the future. None of that equates to notability, though. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 12:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * He was addressed directly and in detail in several articles and media. to find many articles, search his name along with any of his movie projects. Found in several forms and media sites and featured in other languages. Found in Multiple sources, IMDb, Huff Post, NYFA, AUS, CGBros .. and many media coverage that not affiliated with him. He has a significant coverage in reliable sources, he was a panelist at The Future of Film 2017 Conference at the University of Maryland at College Park JackSwan (talk) 20:07, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * IMDB, being user-editable, isn't usually the best source to refer to. I'd also question how independent NYFA would be, since he's a faculty member there as you've indicated. As far as the other sources go, I've searched and genuinely haven't found them. Could you provide a link or two? BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:40, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * For the amount of work he did, he needed more publicity, he deserves it. here are few .. https://www.fof.media/alhallak, http://worldanimationfilmfestival.com/film-animation-news/cg/film-director-al-hallak-of-sci-fi-thriller-the-paradigm-hits-hollywood-by-storm/, https://www.ausalumni.ae/s/1467/17/interior.aspx?sid=1467&gid=1&pgid=252&cid=2673&ecid=2673&ciid=1695&crid=0, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HIKzMNOMhUJackSwan (talk) 22:06, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Again, let's leave the concept of "publicity" out of this. Wikipedia is emphatically not the place either to drum up publicity for someone or to rectify a lack of publicity in their careers. It's all about notability, as discussed above. To the sources you've linked: YouTube doesn't count at all, since it's capable of being uploaded-to by anyone. The FOF link indicates that Hallak is connected with this organisation. Well and good, although there's the open question of how notable the organisation is. It also conveniently indicates his resume, which is probably best described as "thin" at the moment (not a judgement on him, as I understand most films take quite some time to get filmed and released, even with all of Hollywood behind them). Does anything in this resume get him past WP:DIRECTOR? No. The WAFF link is two things, both of them concerning. Firstly, it opens with the statement that Hallak is "on the verge" of success. Admittedly, that dates from 2015, but the object of the exercise here is that he needs to already be notable, rather than requiring a Wikipedia bio to become so (it's a common misconception that things work the other way). Secondly, the link is to a press release from Hallak himself. Remember that one of the key planks of notability is that the sources need to be independent of the subject? That's not remotely independent. The Ausalumni link is also not independent, since it's a Q&A session with Hallak again. As we've discussed before, the point here is that Hallak (or anyone else) needs to have significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. He's a young up-and-comer in - from what I understand - an industry full of young up-and-comers. I'm sure you think very highly of him, but that doesn't mean he gets an article yet. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:43, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I respect your opinion but I disagree, I mean by "publicity" written articles about him and his work, Do you think If he has an article about his work on "Reuters" for example would make him notable? I would argue that he doesn't get the coverage he deserves. I agree that anyone can upload to YouTube, but just to clarify, those YouTube CHs are part of known sites such as http://www.joblo.com, they don't upload any video, think of staff pick on Vimeo. The Future of Film Conference is our annual platform, part of Creative Edge Collaborative https://creativeedgepg.wordpress.com sponsored by Maryland Film Office, they select industry experts for their annual panels at the University of Maryland. I would argue that he is not young and up-and-comer in, and his resume is not thin, how would someone "young up-and-comer in" can be a jury member at a festival sponsored by Boing, a panelist for a conference hosted by University of Maryland, an instructor supervising thises films at the MFA in Filmmaking screened at Warner Brothers in Los Angeles, I am not sure what evidence you are basing your judgment on. I disagree with the note that he is young and up-and-comer. JackSwan (talk) 23:32, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * To address the points in the order in which you raised them. Would a Reuters article make him notable? In the abstract, impossible to say. Again, what makes a subject notable is the existence of multiple, non-trivial, independent and reliable sources. In principle, a Reuters article looking in-depth at his body of work would be all of those things but the first (for the simple reason that it would be one article only), but it would depend on the article. I couldn't give a blanket answer without seeing it. In terms of YouTube, it doesn't matter who or what was responsible for the upload, the fact remains that YouTube doesn't count as a source establishing notability, so we can move onto other topics. I used the terms "young up-and-comer" and "thin resume" to indicate that regardless of what he's done or not done, he doesn't pass either WP:DIRECTOR (for his filmmaking itself) or WP:NACADEMIC (for his faculty position). The evidence I'm basing my judgement on is in those notability guidelines. To consider DIRECTOR: Is Hallak "widely cited by peers or successors"? Not that anything I can see (or that you've provided) demonstrates. Has he "originate[d] a significant new concept, theory or technique"? No sign of that, and considering the longevity of his career to date, I'd say it's unlikely at best. Does he fit the very wordy third criterion there (playing a major role in creating/co-creating a significant body of work which has been analysed extensively, to paraphrase)? No evidence of that, and given the length of his career so far I can't work out how he could have done anyway. The fourth criterion applies more to visual artists, but again there's no evidence of Hallak's films being part of major exhibits in museums yet. The criteria in ACADEMIC basically boil down to a requirement for a much longer faculty career than he's yet had, so I won't waste time on them right now. In other words, he's (by his own words) "on the verge" of success, fame, fortune and everything else. Since he's not there yet, he hasn't attracted the coverage which would meet WP:GNG or the other criteria. Because he hasn't attracted that coverage, he doesn't meet those criteria. Because he doesn't meet the criteria, he isn't notable. Because he isn't notable, there's no reason for him to have an article at present. All of that is based in policies and guidelines to which I have linked you. You're welcome to disagree with those policies and guidelines, but unless and until those change, we all work within them. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 07:06, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I respect your work and the work of the other judges, I am just saying my opinion, It is possible to at least say he is a filmmaker, because he is. I am sure he will have those requirements in the near future .. all the best. JackSwan (talk) 22:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete weighing this article on WP:DIRECTOR it failed all the four points. Plus, neither in my search nor in the article exist sources that shows significant coverage to pass WP:GNG. Might be notable in the future as WP:TOOSOON may also apply here. –Ammarpad (talk) 14:07, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * He was addressed directly and in detail in several articles and media. to find many articles, search his name along with any of his movie projects. Found in several forms and media sites and featured in other languages. Found in Multiple sources, IMDb, Huff Post, NYFA, AUS, CGBros .. and many media coverage that not affiliated with him. He has a significant coverage in reliable sources, he was a panelist at The Future of Film 2017 Conference at the University of Maryland at College Park. JackSwan (talk) 02:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. No sign of evidence of notability by Wikipedia's standards. The one editor saying "keep" uses reasons which have little, or in some cases nothing, to do with the notability guidelines, such as "I would argue that he doesn't get the coverage he deserves". Notability requires that there actually is coverage, not that someone who chooses to edit Wikipedia thinks that there should be. Breaking sticks (talk) 23:51, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * thanks for your note, he has coverage, but it seems to Wikipedia that it's not enough, is there a number of articles that he should have in order to qualify, he has 4 listed already including MovieMaker and Huff Post. If everyone thinks it should be deleted, then let it be, I will keep following his movie projects and events and write again about him in the near future, I truly believe he deserves a page in the future, he is brilliant. JackSwan (talk) 00:02, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, please don't "write about him in the near future" until he meets the criteria we've talked about above. That's a sure-fire way to attract administrative sanction and make it harder for an article to be written about him if and when he achieves notability. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 07:07, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I won't write about him until he meets the criteria, It is possible to at least say he is a filmmaker, is anyone can edit the page to reflect on his achievements. I guess sooner or later he will be covered enough in the media to have a page edited by someone. Thanks, all the best. JackSwan (talk) 22:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:45, 6 December 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.