Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohamed Isnin Saleh


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:05, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Mohamed Isnin Saleh

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

I can't find anything notable about this person outside their arrest and execution. Seems to be a case of WP:BIO1E, and WP:PERP also applies.  Onel 5969  TT me 18:24, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Singapore.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. We do not need an article on everyone executed for drug trafficking. Mccapra (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect back into the drug trafficking cases section of the article about Capital punishment in Singapore where this person's name appears, together with his co-offenders. The most notable thing about this case, as a whole, is that it was supposedly the largest recorded seizure of heroin in Singapore. However, the article has no cited sources to verify this. While WP:BIO1E, and WP:PERP, apply to the individual, WP:NCRIME may make the crime itself notable. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 02:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment - I have discovered that large parts of this article are a very close paraphrasing of one of the cited sources. If the potentially copyright offending parts of the text are removed then the article reduces to about 4 or 5 sentences, basically the lead section and the section describing the execution. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 01:47, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * hi there, i dont think legal judgements are copyrighted, as the idea would be to announce it far and wide, which would necessitate the reproduction of parts of the text word for word. Also, even if it was, the law in Singapore allows the use a copyrighted work without infringing upon the actual copyright if its used by non-profit educational institutions. For example, educational institutions may use online works that are available for free for educational purposes WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 08:14, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Reply - I am not saying this is a copyright violation, only that the Wikipedia text closely paraphrases the judgement text. The website that the judgement comes from claims the contents of the web-page is copyright to the Government of Singapore, so I would rather accept that claim at face value than argue about it. However, because the text has been closely paraphrased, there is also minimal creative effort in the article itself, despite its size. For Wikipedia editors to claim there is copyright, there needs to be an added value of creativity. Additionally, I don't believe the non-profit or educational institution protection applies, because in cases where I have encountered this, there are additional quite specific limitations around the purpose the copying is intended to foster. Wikipedia text is freely available for anyone to reuse, for any purpose, provided they abide by Wikipedia's copyright terms. Lastly, Wikipedia has its own rules about copyright, which essentially says don't plagiarize other works (even when they are in the public domain), nor to pass them off as the editors own words. This means you need to attribute everything you write, and say where you got the information from. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 00:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: WP:SINGLEEVENT. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Fails WP:CRIME #1, and #2. Because we have article lists or embedded lists does not mean every person on the list is notable, nor is the event. I will offer that many of the names at Capital punishment in Singapore are not notable so there is no rationale to add to it. Notable events usually receive coverage beyond a relatively short news cycle. --  Otr500 (talk) 16:45, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete clearly fails WP:PERP. WP:ONEVENT also applies here. LibStar (talk) 08:40, 31 January 2023 (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.