Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhamad Naji Subhi Al Juhani (3rd 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   delete. -- Cirt (talk) 12:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Muhamad Naji Subhi Al Juhani
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Previously discussed in 2006 at Articles for deletion/Muhamad Naji Subhi Al Juhani (no consensus) and in 2008 at Articles for deletion/Muhamad Naji Subhi Al Juhani (2nd nomination) (no consensus). Despite having been around for so long and having survived two AfD's by a no consensus, the article has just two independent sources, one just naming him in a list of released detainees, and the other spending one sentence on him. There are no reliable indepth independent sources about him, so he fails WP:BIO. (Note that searching for sources is made difficult by the different ways his name is written, and by the multiple persons with very similar names, e.g. Khalid Ibn Muhammad al-Juhani). Fram (talk) 12:38, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Guantanamo Bay detainment camp-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - I could not find any independent sources either that go beyond simply mentioning his name. Pantherskin (talk) 16:42, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unless one buys into the idea that everyone who was detained at Guantanamo is automatically notable just because of that, I don't even see a claim to notability here. This individual was released from Guantanamo and repatriated to Saudi Arabia over 4 years ago, so if he wanted to tell his story to the media since then, he could have done so. But either (1) he didn't want to tell his story to the media, or (2) the media weren't interested in it, or (3) he did tell his story to the media but such reports have not been found and used as sources in this article. In any event, though, what is in this article now does not appear to justify a biography of a living person. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Biographies made up entirely of templates and primary documents do not belong in this encyclopedia.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 02:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, Franklin Sousley, Harlon Block, and Michael Strank), John Bradley, Rene Gagnon, and Ira Hayes all have well-respected articles despite their only "fame" being that they were the men in the photograph of raising the flag on Iwo Jima...I see no reason this circumstance is any different. It is a notable case of a miscarriage of justice, and knowing the stories behind the men is important. Papermoneyisjustpaper (talk) 03:35, 10 February 2011 (UTC)Papermoneyisjustpaper (talk) 03:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment No offence but looking at your editing history i ask myself if you are a sockpuppet. I suggest your !vote should be discounted unless you provide us with the necessary references that would establish notability. IQinn (talk) 03:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * E.g. Harlon Block has this as one of the sources. Where are the comparable sources for Al Juhani? You claim that it is a notable case, but per WP:N, we need independent sources for this, not just your personal opinion. Fram (talk) 07:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - subject lacks "significant independent coverage" in reliable sources under the general notability guideline. Bulk of the references are primary documents per WP:PRIMARY. Anotherclown (talk) 09:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - as per nom and Anotherclown. IQinn (talk) 10:16, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 01:06, 14 February 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.