Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nader El-Bizri


 * 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. While AcademeEditorial's comments and keep rationale do not subscribe to the generally accepted protocols followed at Afds, I believe his points broadly are resonated by the other Keep editors, including Cullen. While closing this Afd, I should suggest that editors may give heed to the issues pointed out by DGG in his closing statement, and to whether any significant change in the structure of the article is required. (non-admin closure)  Lourdes  14:51, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Nader El-Bizri

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Struggling to see how he can pass Notability (academics). According to his AUB page, he became an associate professor in 2012. An editor is claiming that he is now a full professor, but I can fine nothing to really support this, and that would not be enough to pass in any event. Article has a history of editing of questionable neutrality, and is rather promotional. Lots of cites and publications, but seemingly little of much note. Edwardx (talk) 10:36, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Possibly Criteria no. 2 via the Kuwait Prize? How do we decide if this is "a highly prestigious academic award"? Kendall-K1 (talk) 00:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Good question. It appears that every year several Arab scholars receive a Kuwait Prize from the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences (KFAS). 5 in 2014, inc El-Bizri. From KFAS's FAQs, "Categories change every year. The list of categories and topics are announced every year ... we are unable to reveal the names of the members of the evaluation committees due to the privacy policy of KFAS." With regard to whether it might count as a "highly prestigious academic award", that is not encouraging, nor is the fact that we don't have an article on the prize or the awarding organisation. In my view, it wouldn't meet criterion no.2. Edwardx (talk) 00:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:49, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:51, 8 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - promotional. Govindaharihari (talk) 12:57, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment – I can't find much but maybe there are non-English sources. Here is the only substantial secondary RS I can find: . The article obviously needs to be cut way back and edited for clarity if it survives. Kendall-K1 (talk) 14:15, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Look first at his university official AUB.edu webpage such, then double click on it his summary official CV. Look also at one of the most prestigious awards in the Arab world he received as noted on the official website of the Ordered Universe Project under the patronage of the AHRC in the UK. See also this noted on the university website. Then look at his ranking 59 as Thought Leader in the Arab world (and this groups not only philosophers but scientists, journalists, activists, religious authorities, poets), you have to search within the rankings and designate the subfield of philosophy and he is 3rd in the Arab world (and the Arabs have very rarely philosophers nowadays!). This is the tip of what you can find about him, if time is taken properly all the editing decisions made with haste will be avoided (AcademeEditorial (talk) 14:39, 8 July 2017 (UTC))

Govindaharihari, why to "delete", just like that? Give sound reasons. If you have not found sources, maybe you needed to look further? Or is this just an arbitrary decision because you felt like it?? Explain!! (AcademeEditorial (talk) 14:48, 8 July 2017 (UTC))

Official material are available via his university and there is there an official CV. Has anyone bothered to look it? (AcademeEditorial (talk) 14:49, 8 July 2017 (UTC))


 * Wikipedia does not consider material written by the subject of an article (e.g. CVs) except in a very limited way, because it is not independent. There are particularly strict rules for WP:Biographies of living persons.  It would help if you could add further reliable independent sources (WP:RS) in which the subject has been written about at length.  It would also help if you could remove all the CV-style material that is not encyclopaedic.   D b f i r s   19:48, 8 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Dbfirs, I am not suggesting looking at the subject's CV as if it was published by him, what I meant is look at the official university website where he is based, namely, then through it you double click on it his summary CV which cannot be placed on the university website unless it is official, hence after clicking there you find the following: . This is just an example; other links are shown above to further sources, and more appears via Google search that is useful for the discussion. I hope this clarified what I meant (AcademeEditorial (talk) 20:43, 8 July 2017 (UTC))


 * Thank you for that link, which certainly suggests that we should be able to find some good independent references. ( By the way, I was puzzled at the mixture of American and British English in that CV. )    D b f i r s   07:14, 9 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Dbfirs: (By the way, I looked at the Cv again and I guess from what I can see the use of American and British English is not connected to the body of the text but to names of institutions and titles of publications, which from what I can tell relate to how these are actually spelled by the sources or the style guidelines of the publishers of his works. So this is an accurate way of mentioning names and titles, etc. as they figure in their original sources and not inconsistency). (AcademeEditorial (talk) 09:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC))


 * Yes, the CV is clearly written in American English (practice, not practise), but I think you are correct that they added the "middle a" to "encyclopaedias" because of the official titles that follow. I think you are correct in campaigning to avoid deletion of the article, but it would help if you can find some independent sources. [ ... later ... sorry, I see that you have already done so.]   D b f i r s   16:09, 9 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - It has a longstanding history on wikipedia since 2008, with multiple editors contributing to it, large numbers of visitors, and daily, and there is a basis for keeping it and making improvements to its contents after doing patient and proper search about the subject of the article (AcademeEditorial (talk) 22:05, 8 July 2017 (UTC)) — AcademeEditorial (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep He meets WP:ACADEMIC criterion #2 "The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level" as a winner of the Kuwait Prize in 2014, given by the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences. I was notified on my talk page about this debate by . Another editor expressed the opinion that I was being canvassed. I disagree since AcademeEditorial could not possibly have known what position I would take on this deletion debate. I commend AcademeEditorial for improving this article. Cullen328   Let's discuss it  02:11, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Please see above for why the Kuwait Prize does not appear to be "a highly prestigious academic award". Edwardx (talk) 10:25, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

DEAR ALL EDITORS: I made various improvements to the references today 9 July 2017 by seeking reliable sources, websites, published material citations, and fixes of dead links. There are many other sources to consult still if time is invested in proper searches. As I noted in the talk pages and noticeboards, I have knowledge in the humanities and in tracing sources in such fields. The article would need additional technicalities to be cleaned in terms of presentation. I also looked at the KFAS, and the recipients of its awards are notable scientists, and you can search their names via Google to realize that they are of the highest calibre of what comes from scientists and scholars of Arab descent in terms of research. I fully understand how at times awards coming from the Arab region are viewed against the background of devastating conflicts for decades in that part of the world, but we have to also be patient and discerning in the way we measure accomplishments from that region and not simply aim at the same level of expectations that we immediately have from MIT, Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford; and I stating this while also fully acknowledging that many Arabs are making international academic and scientific contributions of great worth. I am not seeking polemics but highlighting aspects that need pondering when making decisions here or making judgements about Arab institutions and foundations. Thanks for these exchanges that reveal how wikipedia is self-corrective (AcademeEditorial (talk) 08:29, 9 July 2017 (UTC))


 * DEAR EDITORS: In addition to what I noted above, and after a careful search, and based on notability aspects that are used in academia, such as citations, esteem, contributions to scholarship, one example among others, if you look at the Oxford University Press website: https://global.oup.com/academic/content/series/e/epistles-of-the-brethren-of-purity-epbp/?cc=gb&lang=en&

you will see there 12 volumes of Arabic critical editions and English translations with commentaries published since 2007 to date. These are under El-Bizri’s General Editorship. Two of the volumes are authored by him and all of them carry his “Foreword”, which indicates also intellectual leadership and not only editorship. Forewords are written by authorities in a field within the humanities. This is not simply a contribution from within the Arab scholarship, it is international and has the names of established scholars that you could locate via your own searches. The main merits of this book series are evident for those working in premodern intellectual history since it comes 70 years after Oxford published the Aristotle volumes in Greek and English, and to have Arabic philosophy in the same format now is a main development in the field. El-Bizri’s contribution in this regard is itself a sign of notability based on academic criteria (AcademeEditorial (talk) 09:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC))


 * Borderline keep (notified by watching philosophy-related deletion discussions). He's been cited reasonably well, edited and co-edited journals and books, and has been active as an architect, but I don't think any of this is with sufficient distinction to meet NACADEMIC 1, 8, or 9. However, the KFAS prize has a global scope, a $130,000 USD cash prize, and a reasonably distinguished list of former winners, such as Ahmad Teebi. El-Bizri's appearances on the BBC  also contribute to criterion 7. FourViolas (talk) 15:03, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Please see above for why the Kuwait Prize does not appear to be "a highly prestigious academic award". The prize value and list of recipients are of little relevance in assessing prestige - where is the in-depth commentary about the prize in reliable sources? Edwardx (talk) 10:28, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Please, we are not discussing here the Merits of the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences (KFAS). The Kuwait foundation that gives the Prize is highly reputable, and you can also find many entries on it in Arabic sources. It also has connections with other reliable organizations, such as:

American Association for the Advancement of Science https://www.aaas.org/news/aaas-and-kuwaiti-partners-expand-global-science-communication ScienceDirect http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0045653587902773 Arab Thought Organization http://arabthought.org/en/kuwait-foundation-advancement-science#.WWNf4tPyuu4 Let is be measured and sensible in our approach to bring integrity to this exercise (AcademeEditorial (talk) 12:52, 10 July 2017 (UTC))
 * Just to reassure AcademerEditorial following his edsum on the above post. I have checked the history of this page using the Page History link near the top. You could use that link to check as well. Be assured that nobody has altered your posts in any way. -Roxy the dog. bark 13:55, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I have just verified and also see no evidence of deletion (other than occasional copy-editing of your own comments by yourself). However, the way you add long comments and their placement and indentation make them difficult to follow.  — Paleo  Neonate  - 13:58, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks kindly PaleoNeonate and Roxy (AcademeEditorial (talk) 16:11, 10 July 2017 (UTC))


 * Comment Some editors have questioned whether or not the Kuwait Prize is "prestigious". Here is a webpage for a research consortium that includes four excellent universities that calls the Kuwait Prize "prestigious". The lack of an English Wikipedia article about a prize in the Arab world is evidence of nothing. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  19:49, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * What is being questioned is whether it is "highly prestigious". And that article is based on a press release, and is published on the website of the Pritzker Neuropsychiatric Disorders Research Consortium about a member of staff at one of their five constituent institutions. Thus of questionable objectivity. Edwardx (talk) 20:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * If you doubt the objectivity of a consortium including four of the best universities in the United States,, then I imagine that nothing can possibly satisfy you on this point. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  20:50, 10 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep there seem to be adequate independent reliable sources. Thincat (talk) 20:45, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. His university clearly labels him as a professor as well as the director of the Civilization Studies Program. The Kuwait Prize is competitive and awarded by the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences. It is awarded for lifetime contributions by an Arab scientist and currently carries with it an award of about $130,000. There may be those who feel that an award limited to this group wouldn't have enough capable scientists available to make this a notable award, but that is patently ridiculous. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:31, 10 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep and revise I was asked to comment. I am not a specialist in either philosophy or Arab science, but I can recognize the major publications in the field, and distinguish between major and less important academic appointments.   He is clearly notable, based on the usual criterion for academics, his publications, and the editorship of a major journal and an important book series. (I recognize it is difficult to spot the key factors in this incredible over-elaborate article.) Since  the article is impossibly promotional   it must be rewritten, including condensation, removal of expressions of praise, purging of minor material, eliminating importance by association, and removal of implications of his stance that are not obvious from the titles of what he published.   I've started rewriting. I removed the section on book chapters, which for any academic count as minor publications. I've made a start on removing articles in what seem relatively minor journals. I'm removing some of the claims that rely on implication or self-published material, along with the footnotes trying to justify them.  I'm going to do a little more this evening, but I may not finish, and  urge theo thers people in the discussion to assist.
 * Based on the comments from the contributor, who presumably has a conflict of interest that needs to be declared, I am a little concerned that some of this might be restored, especially because some of the material that needs most to be removed has been added in the course of this discussion. If it restored, this should be brought back here for deletion as deliberate promotion.
 * I am quite concerned with the addition of the individual's own publications to other articles during the course of this discussion--assuming a conflict of interest, this is something which is not acceptable, and I shall soon go through and remove them, unless I think they are clearly justified. I am even more concerned by the contributor's addition of "news release" tags to a number of relatively unexceptional articles for other academics in this and allied fields during the course of the discussion--I consider it close to vandalism, ; see POINT. I shall remove them too, unless I think them clearly justified.   I don't like to do this is the course of a discussion, but in this particular case I think the insertions justify a warning tag on the contributors talk page. I have placed it, and will block if it continues or if the ones I remove are restored without consensus on the individual talk pages.
 * WP does not publish full academic CVs, but only what is likely to be relevant to interested readers of a general encyclopedia . DGG ( talk ) 23:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment/Clarification/Query : Dear Participating Editors. I continued adding references and sources today 15 July 2017 and building on earlier edits and improvements done by DGG, Kendall-K1 and other editors. I explained my edits step-by-step as recommended by some of you, including the helpful suggestions from Roxy. Given that this discussion has been taking place for a week and many significant edits have been implemented, will the article receive now an overall re-evaluation to see if the discussions and edits resolved most of the issues or generated significant improvements? The feedback and update is needed. I am also personally curious to know more about the protocols in terms of decision-making in this case; namely when would the discussion and improvements be judged as being sufficient and adequate, and who decides from administrators or participating editors on the next move etc.? Thank you for your helpful advice and looking forward to your responses [my same comment/clarification/query has been also posted on the article's Talk-page] (2A02:C7D:36C6:8300:CD4:ECC3:F175:CCA6 (talk) 10:51, 15 July 2017 (UTC))


 * Keep He is known for his exegesis of Heidegger in Islamic context. For example he has been a keynote speaker in this conference. Ali Pirhayati (talk) 12:00, 15 July 2017 (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.