Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward A. Shadid


 * 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. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 01:57, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Edward A. Shadid

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Appears to fail GNG for politicians. SarahStierch (talk) 19:52, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm... this seems like sort of a borderline case, doesn't it? I'm going to need to give this one some further examination.
 * OK, so for this article, the relevant notability guidelines would be the ones listed at WP:POLITICIAN. For this article to be retained, it must meet one of the following two criteria (a third one is listed, but it is basically a reiteration of the second one, so I will not add it here):


 * 1) Politicians and judges who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members or former members of a national, state or provincial legislature. This will also apply to those who have been elected but not yet sworn into such offices: This is obviously not applicable to Shadid, who has only ever held local office in Oklahoma City.
 * 2) Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage: This is the criterion that needs to be met in order for Shadid's article to be retained. So far, I'm not 100% sure either way, although I'm leaning towards the argument that this person probably isn't given enough significant coverage for inclusion. This Google search brings up several relevant results from reliable sources, but none of them appear to establish national or international notability (ie. outside of Oklahoma City), which means the bare minimum in his care would have to be subnational importance. The most eye-catching assertion of notability for Shadid is the fact that Ralph Nader allegedly spoke at one of his events; however, the source provided merely states that Nader spoke to a group of people there, and does not specify who was actually hosting the social gathering.
 * In the bitter end, after all's been said and done, I'm leaning towards delete. The dubious notability of the article's subject notwithstanding, I subscribe to the belief that the threshold should be higher for BLPs. Since this is such a borderline case (at least from my perspective), I'm a bit more comfortable with deleting it as opposed to keeping it. Kurtis (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

An earlier article promoting the appearance of Ralph Nader specified that Ed Shadid was hosting the event. http://capitolbeatok.com/reports/nader-will-visit-oklahoma-city-to-boost-ballot-access-reforms It might also be noteworthy that in addition to being a member of the city council in the capital city of Oklahoma he also ran for state office and received the endorsement of two political parties in the state. Both the Green Party and the Pirate Party endorsed him in his 2010 bid for House Seat 85. http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/07/oklahoma-green-party-endorses-dr-edward-shadid-for-ok-state-house/ http://www.scribd.com/doc/38689737/Edward-Shadid-Response-to-the-Pirate-Party-of-Oklahoma-Endorsement-Survey German oklahoman (talk) 16:21, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Ralph Nader did travel to speak at an event for Dr. Ed Shadid. http://www.capitolbeatok.com/reports/analysis-nader-s-ballot-access-message-may-prove-persuasive Dr. Shadid is considered the most progressive politician in Oklahoma. He has held 3 town halls that average 400 people each time. https://vimeo.com/edshadid/videos. Shadid's cousin was NY Times journalist Anthony Shadid, multiple Pulitzer Prize winner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedFlag46 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Dr. Shadid spoke at the national convention of the Arab American Anti-discrimination Committees earlier this year, and was quoted in POLITICO. His remarks caused some consternation as it is thought he alleged that his cousin was murdered. See the story at http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/06/shadid-said-to-have-blamed-death-on-nyt-127119.html which also has a video of the event. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpeaceokc

A report in the NY Times Examiner about Dr. Ed Shadid's comments on his cousin's death. http://www.nytexaminer.com/2012/06/dr-edward-shadids-remarks-on-anthony-shadid-at-adc-convention/ jpeaceokc

This is a much longer article from the TRUTHOUT website about Dr. Shadid's commments about the responsibility of the NY Times for the death of his brother in Syria. It gives a lot more significant details than the POLITICO story, quoting Dr. Ed Shadid as its source. http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/10204-burying-the-story-along-with-the-body-anthony-shadid-and-the-new-york-times jpeaceokc


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oklahoma-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 07:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete. As a politician, the subject fails the criteria necessary for a stand alone article set forth at WP:POLITICIAN. Although I do not think it is necessary, I have no strong objections to a redirect to Anthony Shadid since his comments regarding Anthony Shadid's death did receive media coverage. The relevant guideline regarding redirect would be WP:BLP1E. Location (talk) 23:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * A significant number of new citations have been added to the article. --Jmbranum (talk) 20:44, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. There seems to be a mistaken assumption that Politician is the only possibly applicable notability guideline.  -- No  unique  names  04:45, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:25, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. New sources added, none particularly reliable.  No significant coverage; much of this article is about the death of his cousin.  --  Wikipedical (talk) 00:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Some of the cited sources may not be deemed to be reliable, but other cited sources are, such as the citations to The Oklahoman, The Oklahoma Gazette, The Edmond Sun and the NY Times. The first 3 are significant media outlets in Oklahoma, while the last is a significant world-wide media source. --Jmbranum (talk) 00:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:GNG, raises Coatrack and thus WP:BLP issues. Even his political efforts didn't generate much source coverage. There's some information on a Dr. Edward Shadid, but that may be about the dad: Wife's obit: Oklahoman May 1, 2003, son's obit: Oklahoman October 15, 2004, he sold his home: Oklahoman November 11, 2006, Edward Shadid (born February 6, 1926) obit in the January 22, 2007 Oklahoman. As for the subject of the Wikipedia article, the following may be relevant: a Hammam, Dina v. Shadid, Edward A. II divorce Oklahoman May 12, 2007, Doc plans house calls at condo project in OKC: Journal Record February 28, 2008,. Then there's the usual newspaper statistical information that is published when a person runs for office. After that was published, there a sentence about Shadid in Los Angeles Times December 17, 2010. That's about it. Seems the current Wikipedia article is more of a Coatrack used to get negative information about or connected with Dr. Shadid into Wikipedia. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 09:04, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't understand the Coatrack allegation. The article has no negative information about Shadid. --Jmbranum (talk) 16:49, 21 September 2012 (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.