Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lara Nabhan


 * 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. (non-admin closure) ––FormalDude (talk)  02:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Lara Nabhan

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Doesn't seems notable journalist. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk ! 16:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk !  16:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 December 6.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 16:52, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, Television, Lebanon,  and United Arab Emirates. Skynxnex (talk) 17:06, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep: Your rationale is unfounded in policy. My Arabic is...bad...but those available in Arabic are sufficient to establish notability. Another source, this one in English, adds enough limited context to her biographical background that we surpass WP:GNG, if only barely. ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:25, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * How does that link help? It's just a standard quote from a coworker at the time of someone's passing. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:25, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: There is some coverage of her, but a lot of it seems to be based off her appearance. I'm not seeing her meeting WP:GNG or WP:JOURNALIST based on the sources provided and some searches I made. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:24, 7 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep While there is tabloid coverage about her appearance, she was also the subject of news when she was the victim of an assault:
 * https://palsawa.com/post/157874/%D9%86%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%A8%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D8%AD%D9%81%D9%8A%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%AA%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%AA%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%A1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D8%AD%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A7-%D9%83%D9%86%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%86
 * Her health was the subject of news when she caught COVID https://yasour.org/2018/en/news/details/news-53407
 * Her tweets made CNN Arabic news https://arabic.cnn.com/middle-east/article/2019/07/31/lebanon-mashrou-leila-concert-cancelled (not significant coverage)
 * I cannot comment on the strength of the sources of the first two, but I've seen enough to think she is notbale. CT55555 (talk) 02:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * But Palsawa.com and Yasour.org are not a reliable source. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️Let's Talk ! 10:42, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Palsawa.com is the url. The Sawa News Agency is the source of the first one.
 * Likewise Yasour.org is a url, we're talking about Ya Tire Social Cultural Media Group, which was founded in 2005
 * I've searched WP:RSPSS and, unsurprisingly, it is silent on both. There is no consensus that they are either reliable or unreliable. I find that to the be norm for Arabic language news sources. It doesn't mean they are depreciated or bad, it's just normal for Wikipedia editors to assess English language and European language sources. So we need to make a judgement. As I said I cannot be certain of the strength of them. It seems obvious that they are weaker than The New York Times, but the google translate of the text seemed credible. If the content was controversial, I'd not use it for verifiability, but for the task of assessing of someone is notable, I consider them useful. CT55555 (talk) 17:25, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete no notable program is mentioned which she presents. --2003:E0:F70F:B700:F8FD:5C18:53CD:652F (talk) 01:08, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * There is no obligation to be affiliated with a notable program, only for the subject themselves to be notable. This is not a valid justification to delete. CT55555 (talk) 00:01, 13 December 2022 (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.