Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gihan Sami Soliman


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 06:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Gihan Sami Soliman

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Autobiography and promotional. Author created multiple pages about projects. Though admirable, only sources that I can find are ones belonging to author, social media sites, and other websites that would represent a COI. Also, author continued to add HTML hyperlinks within article text to link back to her own websites. jsfouche &#9789;&#9790; Talk 04:44, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment from author: External links were added for verification of notability and link to the auther's website deleted.


 * a special consideration needs to be made of the regime of corruption that had been ruling Egypt for 30 years and supressing any kind of real reform coming from the community which might explain the scarcity of research and knowledge on the topic.


 * Here are some facts about the education in Egypt that shows the need for reform 1- students are required to pass the SAT test with a minimum score of 1440 and that score forms 60% of the qualifying grades for college. Which is a HUGE power wasted in preparation of a non-achievement test on the other hand no other achievement tests are required to graduate or enter college.


 * National Quality Assurance NAQAAE allocated a whole quality standard for curriculum design while the one who designs the national curriculum is the Ministry of Education the Accrediting association are foreign ones which means they have no real perspective of the king of community participation needed.


 * Low ranking of Egyptina Universities inspite of all the govermental talk about reform and quality assurance. * Stated in the article that Gihan Sami Soliman reads جيهان سامي سليمان  and you can find related articles on her in Arabic (local media) where reform is needed and is taking place.


 * Also the article has no promotional material about any profitable business of any sort, it's all about reform achieved by volunteers. Please re-consider the value of this article as a good start of educational reform in Egypt coming from educators...Thank you G.S. Soliman (talk) 13:06, 17 July 2011 (UTC) [Special:Contributions/Doveye71|contribs]]) 06:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * delete unless better sources can be found - I went through it and once you've deleted the material that is not specifically about the individual concerned, the spammy non-references what you are left with is the CV of someone who does not seem to be notable. --Cameron Scott (talk) 15:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * looking further into this, most of the 'international' organisations that this individual is running or is involved in seems to simply a series of unfinished and badly designed websites. --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * keep This article was created on July 16, 2011. That was yesterday. I think we need to allow some time, perhaps two weeks, to address the related issues. G.S. Soliman i.e. G.S. Soliman (talk) will better appreciate the process, if we take our time. And show our good will to a newbie. I have questions about the news agency cited. Is there anyway to find how reliable the agency is. Does it have a reputaton in Egypt? G.S. Soliman help us help the article. It is better to work with editors who don't have a conflict of interest in the article. Don't give up. Let's do this a correctly as possible following Wikipedia rules. Also, remember an article that enters a debate for survival, it it survives, it is usually better because of the "fight". DonaldRichardSands (talk) 17:02, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Note - Just a reminder, AfDs are not intended to force cleanup. This is a discussion to determine whether or not the subject is notable.  That means that if there are suitable references out there that satisfy WP:N, they don't have to be added for the article for it to be kept.  In short, we can't just wait for people to add references if they can't even provide evidence that they exist.  If anyone has information that can "address the related issues", this is the place and time to share it with everyone.  If you don't and the article is deleted, it can always be brought back if anyone ends up being able to address the issues.   Ol Yeller  Talktome 18:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I have investigated the possibility of the subject fulfilling three notability guidelines: WP:GNG, WP:BIO, and WP:PROF. Of course, the subject would only need to fulfill one (or another that I haven't thought of) to be considered notable.  My findings are below.
 * WP:GNG - A Google News search and Google News Archive search for any variation of "Gihan Sami Soliman" produces no references (i.e. "Gihan Sami Soliman", "Gihan Soliman", and Gihan Sami Soliman). The only coverage I could find was this translated from Spanish via Google Translate.  The article, in my opinion, was published by a reliable source but does not constitute reliable coverage as it is significant coverage of an event and not of the subject of the article (it could be used to establish notability for an article of the event where the Soliman is listed but not much else).  The 4 websites listed in the article's reference area  do nothing to help establish notability.  The first three don't mention the subject (not significant coverage) and the fourth is her own website (not independent).  The subject's personal website provided no leads for establishing notability but does raise some copyright infringement issues.  In short, I can not find enough coverage for the subject to satisfy WP:GNG.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 18:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:BIO - Similar to my search above, the only coverage of the subjects work, in my opinion, don't fulfill WP:ARTIST (subsection of WP:BIO). The closest the subject comes is on point three and the collective work covered in the article above isn't enough.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 18:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:PROF - As the "the head of Port Said American School, Zamalek", the subject may be an academic. The school does not have an official website.  From the information on this website, it appears to be a private high school and while there is no specific notability guideline for school, I follow the common belief that high schools are notable (this only matters to me because I would have stopped there if it was anything less).  There are other teaching/training activities listed but I don't feel that any of them could be used to establish notability.  The closest the subject comes to satisfying WP:PROF is on point seven which states that a person is notable if they, " [have] held a major highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society" but this school is in no way a "major" academic institution.  In short, I can not see how the subject could satisfy WP:PROF.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 18:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As I don't believe that the subject has fulfilled any of these guidelines and I don't see how they would satisfy any other, I have !voted Delete. I've attempted to be as thorough as possible for the sake of the author (a new user) and anyone else who might not fully understand WP:N and how this process works.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 18:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I should mention, I'm not confident that Google would find every reference published online about the subject (due to recent events in Egypt and language issues). I'm open to changing my opinion based on newly discovered information.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 18:41, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete The nomination was on the grounds of notability. The subject may well be involved in praiseworthy reform of institutions, but it's not Wikipedia's place to support this by not adhering to the established editorial practices. There is patent conflict of interest and a lack of demonstration of notability. If more time is needed, as suggested by DonaldRichardSands, then I would advise taking the article down and improving it by showing notability. asnac (talk) 18:49, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * At this point, it doesn't look good for the survival of the Gihan Sami Soliman article because of its apparent failing the Notability test.  It is possible to establish a Sandbox article where the interested editor can work on an article until it meets the Wikipedia tests. If someone starts such a Sandbox article, please let us know. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 19:12, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ask the closing admin (assuming the result is Delete) to userfy the article for you. Ol Yeller  Talktome 19:20, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

but pls. have a look at my last edit .. it might work this time G.S. Soliman (talk) 19:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Proposal - Had I come across this as a new page, I would have tagged it as a WP:G11. Is there any reason not to at this point?  The COI seems to be getting out of hand and we simply seem to be fighting fires to keep this from being an unambiguous advertorial.  Is there anyone besides the author that would oppose a G11 speedy deletion?  Ol Yeller  Talktome 20:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no issue with this, except that letting it conclude at AfD gives additional rationale for CSD if it is recreated. In light of the author's insistence to continue editing in spite of all the work, suggestions, and advice given, I strongly feel she should be blocked from further editing. Editors who ignore established guidelines and advice from seasoned editors are subject to being blocked. jsfouche &#9789;&#9790; Talk 20:32, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sir .. I didn't insist .. I'm just new to editing Wikipedia .. apologies G.S. Soliman (talk) 21:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * What harm is there in taking the extra few days in helping Doveye71 see how Wikipedia's rules work. I think the Block suggestion is unwarranted. Many of us have met editors who deserved being block, Doveye71 has no such track record with Wikipedia. This article up for discussion has some hurdles seemingly insurmountable. Of course, Wikipedia has many faces, some stern, some indulgent, with many in between. Doveye71, let this play out. Your work for your country must continue whatever happens here at Wikipedia. I continue to recommnend that you consider developing a Sandbox approach to the article. If you are interested in such an approach, let us know. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 21:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

OK ..I am interested with gratitude..Thanks G.S. Soliman (talk) 21:59, 17 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. The seven days of the AfD is long enough to find reliable sources. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC).

Hello since I'm being warned not to edit the article my I propose this link below(it will need translation)as an evidence that Port Said American School( devision of the umbrella Port Said schools, Zamalek ) is a major educational institute in Cairo http://ahramdigital.org.eg/Community.aspx?Serial=518754 (noting that Al Ahram is the most prestigious media organization in Egypt) Thank you G.S. Soliman (talk) 20:36, 17 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs)
 * Comment- Yesterday, the article's editor agreed to not further edit the autobiographical article, but today has apparently recanted that by making additional edits, including re-adding external links to the article. jsfouche &#9789;&#9790; Talk 21:09, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:GNG and shows no prospect of meeting it anytime soon. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per OlYeller21. No evidence of notability. No Google hits that are independent of the subject of this autobiography. -- 202.124.72.14 (talk) 06:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of media coverage. I didn't see any notable sources on both Google and Yahoo. SwisterTwister   talk  21:03, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep she is the head of a major school and she seems to have made a notable contribution to advancing the quality of education in her country. The events are recent but influential as Egypt has gone through prolonged phases of corruption, and reform is now getting to be possible by young community leaders. Mazenomda (talk) 05:58, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * She is a program coordinator, and headship only confers notability under WP:Prof of a major academic institution, which a secondary school is not. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC).
 * Mazenomda, Xxanthippe is correct. Did you read any of the rest of this AfD or just come in guns blazing?  Ol Yeller  Talktome 13:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * no gun blazing or anything, I just think there should be some consideration to her being an educational leader of some significance and employing this to make some reform .. well she's the owner of several websites that call for reform and the intellectual property of Egypt's got Talents as the pictures show, actually, I think she should be listed under a category of social entrepreneurs in her country,if there is such category, not by any means as a super academic person. I just wanted to share my point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The above comment borders on abuse of editing privileges. The comment is made by the author of this autobiography, yet written as a third person.  Once signbot attributed the comment to the author, the author deleted it.  I reverted the deletion to preserve the evidence of tampering with an AfD discussion.  jsfouche &#9789;&#9790; Talk 13:59, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The user Mazenomda, an WP:SPA, came here and !voted to keep with, in my opinion, a very poor reason. Doveye71, the subject of the article in question, replied as if she wrote the Mazenomda !vote then attempted to cover her tracks by removing the comment.  I'm going to initiate an WP:SPI.  Several people have spent a good deal of time trying to help Doveye71 with this article and help her understand the policies and guidelines of WP and to attempt to sock at this point, after agreeing not to edit the article then socking, I don't think there's any other avenue to pursue here.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 14:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * you keep deleting my comment .. mazenomda deleted an article for me before and i was just defending him for his point of you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs) 14:05, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * What are you even talking about???? YOU deleted your OWN comment!!  No one else did that!!  I restored your comment because it was suspicious.  And what is this about mazenomda deleting an article???  Only Admins can delete articles.  This entire situation has been the most bizarre I have ever been involved in on WP.  I'm with ya, OlYeller.  Something is very suspicious about this entire thing.  jsfouche &#9789;&#9790; Talk 14:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You wrote a reply for him in first person as if you were him then tried to remove the response. You impersonated another person and attempted to change the outcome of an AfD.  I've opened a sock-puppetry investigation regarding your edits here. No one deleted your comment.  You did and Jsfouche restored it.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 14:23, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Look you keep deleting my reply.. he deleted a page by nominated it for deletion .. I don't know how you can check that but I know you can — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs) 14:31, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, what are you talking about? What comment has been deleted??  Look at the page history.  No one deleted your comment, except yourself.   jsfouche &#9789;&#9790; Talk 14:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No one is deleting your replies. Feel free to check the history.  If I had to guess, you're hitting edit conflicts because multiple people are attempting to post at the same time.  The page you're referring to is this which was immediately declined.  He's never edited a page that you have.
 * Dove, at this point, there's only one question for you to answer: Why did you impersonate another editor then attempt to delete the comment? Please don't insult anyone's intelligence by claiming that you didn't because it's all very clear.  You replied in first person to reply as another user then deleted the comment. Again, why?  Ol Yeller  Talktome 14:45, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Which brings up another concern. Why would you ask another editor "to delete an article for me"?  What does that mean?  Why did you want it deleted, and why did you ask someone else to do it for you??  You do realize that articles are not deleted "for someone", they are deleted because they either meet criteria for speedy deletion, they are proposed as uncontested deletions, or they are discussed and deleted by consensus at AfD like this one.   jsfouche &#9789;&#9790; Talk 15:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I replied as a fisrt person cuz I'm a first person and the article subject is a third person.. isn't this what you keep telling me to do ? look I'm not an English native speaker and might not be perfect in expressing myself .. and i was defending mazenomda as not fire blazing because he seems to be fond of nominating pages for deletion that's why I was flattered by his attempt to save the article .. about the deletion .. I don't know how I got it deleted and how am I getting my comments here deleted as I try to post them  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes he did .. it was (Fungi of Egypt and North Africa) .. I spent days and days working on it and it was gone overnight..you as admins can detect that, can't you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

his talk page with evidence of having tried to delete the "Fungi ..." page and one of the admins here declined his claim then but it was gone anyway.
 * This makes no sense: "I replied as a fisrt person cuz I'm a first person and the article subject is a third person". No one here is obligated to help you.  We've exhaustively tried and you never seem to understand which may be due to a language barrier.  So you're either attempting to mislead and should stop editing here or you can't speak English in a way that you can be helpful and should find your language's WP to edit.  I'm done here.  The AfD will conclude on its own and so will the SPI.  Good luck.  Ol Yeller  Talktome 17:00, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

why is this getting like personal? why are you attacking me? I have given you the evidence that the person you claim I'm personifying has tried to destroy my work before and I'm trying to explain why I talked about the subject of the article in the third person .. no one is obliged to help me and no one is .. I thought this page was for discussing the article on objective grounds.. I do not know why you exert all these efforts editing in Wikipedia and guiding people but I don't think it's because of friendship or anything personal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doveye71 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * The SPI confirmed via checkuser that Mazenomda and Doveye71 are the same person. Ol Yeller  Talktome 03:13, 25 July 2011 (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.