Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fawaz Abd Al Aziz Al Zahrani


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:52, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Fawaz Abd Al Aziz Al Zahrani

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

WP:BLP that lacks reliable independent indepth sources. In one of the sources, he is one entry in a table in an appendix. In the last one, he is one of a number of people convicted, without any further coverage of him. Google searches revealed no further useful searches, either at the full name a given here, or searching for Fawaz Al Zahrani plus Guantanamo (to avoid the many hits for other Fawaz Al Zahranis). Fails WP:BIO. Fram (talk) 15:18, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Guantanamo Bay detainment camp-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 15:32, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment -- I accept, at face value, the claim in the nomination that additional references were searched for. Nevertheless, as I believe this edit shows, if that search had been more thorough it would have found more references. The Saudi detention and torture of British-Canadian William Sampson was a high-profile story here in Canada, for years. I wasn't aware of the connection between his release and the repatriation of the first five Saudis in 2003.  Should the release deal be covered in the William Sampson article?  I don't think so.  Could the release be covered in an article specifically on this particular release of Saudi captives?  I would have no objection to that.  Geo Swan (talk) 18:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment -- With regard to blp1e:
 * capture;
 * Surviving the Qalia-Jangi prison incident;
 * Guantanamo detention;
 * Repatriation as part of a backroom deal;
 * 2 years of Saudi detention;
 * In camera trial, with no defense lawyers;
 * Conditional release that includes a gag order;
 * How many events is that? If it is more than one this article does not lapse from blp1e.  Geo Swan (talk) 18:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Whether it meets BLP1E (and since I didn't mention that as an argument for deletion, it looks like a strawman argument to bring it up now) or not, it fails WP:BIO quite clearly. Ignoring the sources from the American military, we have a truly passing mention (Worthington), another truly massing mantion (HRW), and another passing mention (Salon). So, like I stated, Google gave no other useful sources, and neither do you. We don't have a single reliable independent source that has more than a passing mention of Al Zahrani. Fram (talk) 19:14, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Commment - I have doubts of the notibility of the individual but as I have oft said before whats notible to someone else (european Footbal(American soccer) players for example) may not be notable to me so I usually abstain from voting for or against deletion but I notice you said ignoring the sources from the military. Although I admit that the credibility of the military source is strained given the nature of the article Im not sure that they should be altogether ignored. --Kumioko (talk) 19:42, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * WRT notability, they should be ignored, as they are definitely not independent sources, but sources by a party in a conflict. If the subject is notable, then it is perfectly appropriate to include such sources: but for the sake of an AfD, they can be ignored. Fram (talk) 19:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:08, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:08, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Being a detainee does not itself make one notable. In this case, the subject is not an individual who has attained notabilityt.  There are no real reliable sources for the subject, and he has not been subject to wide coverage.  As such, this clearly violates WP:BIO. --Yachtsman1 (talk) 02:25, 30 November 2010 (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.