Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nour Eddine Tilsaghani


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. While the original nomination rationale was flawed and the editor was blocked as a sock, there is nonetheless a consensus between the two editors who discussed notability considerations that this falls short of our guidelines. signed,Rosguill talk 23:35, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Nour Eddine Tilsaghani

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

A highly promotional article, with a lot of sockpuppetry surrounding its history. It's been repeatedly draftified / declined at AfC, so I thought an AfD discussion to establish a consensus on notability would probably be more useful than moving it to draft yet again. Nominated at 06:45, 12 May 2023 by Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 10:41, 22 May 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 23:32, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2023 May 12.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 07:01, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Photography,  and Morocco.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:05, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Question for . You say that this is "A highly promotional article". This surprises me, in two ways. First, it's not apparent to me that this is a highly promotional article. But before you bother to explain, take a look at Deletion policy. Being highly promotional is not a reason for deletion. The closest is number 4: "Advertising or other spam without any relevant or encyclopedic content". (I'll admit that I don't know what "relevant" means here -- relevant to what? Anyway, feel free to interpret "relevant" as you wish.) Are you saying that this has no encyclopedic content? You also mention sockpuppetry. The worst I can imagine would be if the article were proven to have been created by a block-evading sockpuppet. "Creations by banned or blocked users" are reasons for speedy deletion and thus reasons for deletion via AfD. The creator is indeed blocked as a puppetmaster, but they created the article in October 2022, and was blocked this month for sockpuppetry that only started last month. (Yes, I've looked at the lists of puppets' edits, both extant and deleted.) Are you suggesting that articles should be deleted if their creators were blocked for activity that only started months later? -- Hoary (talk) 08:44, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete Tilsaghani appears to be a notable award-winning photographer, with exhibits and resume. The article itself seems to contain badly translated names of shows and galleries. I don't know enough French or Arabic to clean the article up completely. I think there are some phrases in quotes and parenthesis that are translations to English. I have tried to wikify. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:18, 14 May 2023 (UTC) Changing !vote to Delete WP:TOOSOON WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 00:51, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The article is badly translated due to it being created as a result of cross-wiki spam. The articles’ other language counterparts were deleted for the same reason. B3251 (talk) 01:24, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but I don't see the a article as being "promotional". Am I being overgenerous in thinking he is notable? Thanks. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:32, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the person at the top copy-pasted the reason from another deletion request of somebody else whose article was created by the same account, I wouldn’t 100% go by what was said. As for notability, I couldn’t really find any sources about them to consider them notable enough, in my opinion at least. B3251 (talk) 17:08, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.