Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jehad.net


 * 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. --Ixfd64 05:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Jehad.net

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Not notabable (Notability (web)), and the web address doesnt even work. Matt57 (talk•contribs) 03:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep: Of course it doesn't work, did you read the article? Also, this is a notable domain.-- Ķĩřβȳ ♥  ♥  ♥  Ťįɱé  Ø  12:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * A notable domain? So we make articles on Wikipedia for all notable domains even if they dont work? --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 13:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * We do have articles on closed websites - but they must still satisfy WP:WEB like still-operating ones. Whether sources write about a website when it's operating or after it's closed doesn't matter either. &mdash;Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-17 01:21Z 


 * Delete. Does not warrant own artcle. SYSS Mouse 13:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, a single passing mention in Wired does not notability make. &mdash;Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-16 18:17Z 

just because the american media doesnt discuss a website doesnt mean its not valid......how often to you hear about or from al-jazeera in the united states??? the provisional authority banned the station in iraq after the occupation.....you cant delete an article just because no one has heard of it....thats precisely why it SHOULD have an article   (-ME)


 * &emsp; Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  &emsp; Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 08:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I guess according to the above note I put my comments here. The website's claim to fame is that it was ran by Islamic terrorists and some dope decided to "hack it" and change the password. Some quotes from random articles I accessed:
 * "Jehad.net recently carried a message from bin Laden’s official spokesman, as well as copies of two purported jihadi training manuals: “The Mujahideen Explosives Handbook” and “The Mujahideen Poisons Handbook."


 * "...of Islamist terrorist organizations, the Internet substitutes for the loss of bases and territory. In this respect the most important sites are alneda.com, jehad.net, drasat.com, and aloswa.org, which feature quotes from bin Laden tapes, religious legal rulings that justify the terrorist attacks, and support for the al Qaeda cause.29 In addition, website operators have established a site that is “a kind of database or encyclopedia for the dissemination of computer viruses.”30 The site is 7hj.7hj.com, and it aims to teach Internet users how to conduct computer attacks, purportedly in the service of Islam.31"

It is fairly notable in its own right, regardless of the incident, based on the content that was there and who purportedly ran it. To my knowledge, it is one of the only so called "jihadist" websites that actually gained notoriety in the general public, mainly do to the "hacking incident". Do a google search and read up on the particulars of this domain. (Not being snarky - it is interesting) more [ http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40517 ]  If this is the wrong place for comments and this discussion is still open, please notify me or move my comments. Regards,El hombre de haha 22:05, 23 April 2007 (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.