Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Majed Jaber Alhamoud Al-Sabah


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:43, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Majed Jaber Alhamoud Al-Sabah

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Totally unsourced vanity article that lets us know that he uses "famous applications like Instagram and Snapchat to help him present himself to the people". Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not Facebook. Thomas.W talk 11:11, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * "Sources" have been added, but when checked one is to a non-existant page, one is to a blog-like page (in Arabic but checked through Google Translate) listing people they think have an impact on Instagram etc, and the third is to a page (also in Arabic) listing the names of the board of trustees, including the subject of the article, of a local cultural center. Meaning that none of them establishes any notability for the subject. Thomas.W talk 11:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  13:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep A lot of the sources, try to search in google by use his short name Majed Al-Sabah, moreover I added sources of Time, Bloomberg and CNN.--سامي الرحيلي (talk) 18:06, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malcolmxl5 (talk) 06:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:14, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Lacks real notability Heyyouoverthere (talk) 08:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete basically as unless the Keep voter above can actually better improve the article, this article is obviously still troubled and is best deleted until better is available. Simply nothing convincing to keep as this will simply encourage others to at least say "Hey, that was accepted at AfD, let's add others!". SwisterTwister   talk  04:59, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, basically a vanity article. Just not enough comprehensive coverage to meet WP:GNG. Chrisw80 (talk) 05:18, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Request to revisit the discussion, per sources found. Also pinging to bring this to their attention. North America1000 02:28, 3 April 2016 (UTC)




 * Keep – The subject actually comfortably passes WP:BASIC. Source examples include, but are not limited to:, , , , , , , , , , , , . Perhaps users opining to delete only based their assessment of notability based upon sources that were in the article, rather than the availability of sources, as per WP:NEXIST. North America1000 01:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete, WP:G11, "pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic". I don't know whether he's notable and am frankly not interested in finding out, but this exercise in self-promotion needs to go. Can then be rewritten by a non-COI editor.  Sandstein   21:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete Per Sandstein. The number of reliable independent sources this article has doesn't matter if it fails G11. — Omni Flames  ( talk   contribs ) 06:00, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment – It's all good. I may create a new article from scratch after this is deleted, written from an entirely neutral point of view based only upon what sources state. Then again, I may not... North America1000 06:45, 9 April 2016 (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.