Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammed Salman Hamdani (2nd nomination)


 * 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   keep. Courcelles 00:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Mohammed Salman Hamdani
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Nobody did it for 5 years but... I think we have to delete this one per WP:BLP1E and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Magioladitis (talk) 01:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --みんな空の下 (トーク &#124; I wanna chAngE!) 01:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability was established during the previous nomination. Wee Curry Monster talk 01:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep A simple review of the Google News Archives shows that our policies on one event biographies and that Wikipedia is not a memorial do not apply in this case.  There has been in-depth, ongoing coverage of Mohammed Salman Hamdani every year in the nine plus years since he gave his life on September 11, 2001.  His sacrifice is remembered and highly symbolic. Cullen328 (talk) 03:34, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment He is also discussed in quite a few books published in the past nine years, per a Google Books search. Cullen328 (talk) 03:54, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep but article improvement needed or else we are going to see this again. KimChee (talk) 05:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as per KimChees reasoning. Fully agreeing.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:32, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 00:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 00:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep As far as notability is concerned, the article passes. And the WP:NOTMEMORIAL argument is probably misapplicated in this case. Mar4d (talk) 07:44, 2 January 2011 (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.