Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif


 * 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   no consensus. MuZemike 20:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif

 * – (View AfD (View log  •  AfD statistics)

I speedy deleted this a few days ago as A7. It has now been recreated, though with an external reference to an Amnesty press release. That release, however, isn't about him specifically, though he is mentioned. All the other links to him are mentions in the general articles about disappeared people, or campaign sites/facebook pages etc. That he existed and disappeared isn't in doubt, but sadly he isn't notable, just one of far too many. Ged UK  11:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I searched Google using a transliteration of his name (عزت يوسف المقريف, thanks to Google Translate) (findsources added above) - but even the 13 Google News hits (0 for Scholar or Book) that generated didn't have significant coverage - all the mentions (which appear to be based on 3 or 4 different press releases from what I can see) are minor (basically "Al-Maqrif was taken" with not much else). Sadly, I can find no evidence that he is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. Incidently, if there is another way to transliterate his name, I'd be grateful if someone could add it here, so we could do further searches. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 12:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions.  —--  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 12:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —--  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 12:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  —--  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 12:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The amnest International article is sufficient documentation by itself. The article mentions others, so they can presumably be found as well.    DGG ( talk ) 14:53, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment With respect, DGG, I don't think that the AI article represents the "significant coverage" expected under the notability guidelines: Jaballah Matar and Izzat Youssef al-Maqrif, two prominent opposition activists, disappeared in Cairo in March 1990. For well over a decade, their whereabouts have remained unknown. Their families have received unconfirmed reports, suggesting that they were both handed over to the Libyan authorities immediately following their reported arrests by officers from the State Security Investigations in Cairo, and that they were detained without charge or trial in Abu Salim Prison in Tripoli. I'll admit this is more coverage than any of the sources that I found, which all had a single sentence saying that Al-Maqrif had disappeared/been taken - but it still does not appear to meet the coverage that WP:BIO indicates as required: If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be needed to prove notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 15:13, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * you have quoted the first paragraph of a nine-paragraph article as if it were the entire article, and then claimed the article is unsubstantial.    DGG ( talk ) 16:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I apologise if that is the impression that I've given - for clarity, the section I quoted is indeed one paragraph out of the entire article - but it is the only bit of the article that is about Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif - and personally I do not feel that it meets the 'substantial' requirements - YMMV. The rest of the article is not about him - unless I'm a lot thicker than I am usually (OK, that is a distinct possibility, I know!), in which case I am quite happy to be corrected! --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 16:10, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 3 sentences surely does not equal substantial. The article is about someone else. The Amnesty article confirms their existance, not their notability. Ged  UK  16:12, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per DGG. Amnesty's listings typically result in nontrivial press coverage, and may well themselves satisfy notability guidelines. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * With respect, surely at least some of that press coverage would be available online? Amnesty is a Western organisation, with press coverage subtstantially shown in England and the US (as well as in other European countries) - all of which would generally be available online, but a Google News search didn't show any. If Amnesty was an organisation in a developing-world country, I would agree that (off-line) coverage would possibly exists - but it is not, it is a large developed-world organisation which is very efficient in getting coverage in the likes of the The Times, the The Guardian, New York Times, Washington Post, etc. The article cites a reference from 08 December 2003 - the 'big' newspapers have archives going back at least that far. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:59, 13 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree with DGG. The article is sufficiently sourced for a keep now, and will likely only expand and improve in the future. —  Hunter  Kahn  ( c )  22:29, 12 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. Some of the contents of the article have been rewritten or removed in accordance with WP:C, as they reproduced previously published sources (primarily ). I've instructed the contributor how to verify permission. While we might presume that the correspondent there would be happy to have his words reproduced (I'm sure I would be), our copyright policy doesn't allow us to use it unless it is properly licensed. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:08, 15 December 2009 (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.