Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ferial Masry


 * 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 keep. John254 00:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Ferial Masry

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Another political candidate, this time for the California State Assembly. PROD removed by author, saying "Masry is notable because of history making run, coverage by media, and upcoming book published by a university press." Per WP:BIO, being an unelected candidate for political office does not confer notability; and nor does having written a not-yet-published book. If elected, she will qualify for an article, but until then I don't think being "the first Saudi American to run for political office" is enough. JohnCD (talk) 17:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Good points. I agree that her political run doesn't qualify her for notability. I think she fits the requirements for the exception though ("such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.") I think she has received significant coverage (named ABC's Person of the Week, covered in New York Times, AP, NPR, etc.). Being the first Saudi American to run for office isn't the biggest accomplishment obviously, but I think her news coverage and the book show that a lot of independent sources think it's significant enough to be covered. Hood4546 (talk) 13:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment If agreed (or if not) any tips on what would need to be done to fit requirements? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hood4546 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Here's a link to the ABC reference that can be added. and looks like there's more out there.  She may not meet the specific politician criteria, but looks like there's enough to meet the general, covered in multiple secondary sources, criteria.--Cube lurker (talk) 18:47, 20 June 2008 (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.