Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rafik Yousef (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 speedy keep. Sufficient reliable coverage (especially major news networks). I concur with "keep" votes in this matter. (non-admin closure) TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:44, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Rafik Yousef
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

These discussions are notorious for promoting ignorance in several policies, so I shall be as full as possible in laying out all of them. This is for an actual discussion about notability.


 * This individual was given an article following a minor stabbing incident, and not the more serious event, neither of which are of their own article WP:RAPID applies to state that this individual is not meeting of notability.
 * One major issue is the WP:OR and WP:SYNTH in parts of the background -- there are two sources were published before the stabbing. Who determined the significance of this self-constructed notability other than the article creator?
 * The subject also fails WP:EVENTCRIT which advises writers to bear in mind WP:RECENTISM and that an event, such as a crime, needs more than media coverage (even if it was widely reported) to be notable.
 * No such impact is found in the WP:ROUTINE three-day news cycle this incident received (remember WP:NOTNEWS?). This individual has had two events which they appeared in the news for. Simply appearing in routine news coverage does not equal or equate to being notable, consider WP:GEOSCOPE: the influence of the individual it is limited and brief, if there ever was any. Going down the list at WP:NOTE, the subject fails WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE and WP:INDEPTH; passing mentions in media reports, especially about other incidents, do not contribute to further coverage.
 * I am now going to quote from WP:RSBREAKING: "All breaking news stories, without exception, are primary sources, and must be treated with caution per WP:PSTS". The majority, if not all, of the coverage for this incident was from breaking news, creating a clear lack of reliable secondary sources. Sport and politics (talk) 18:53, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Nom, please don't add canvassing templates to AfDs where canvassing is not occurring.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:12, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:34, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:34, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:35, 2 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Being convicted and imprisoned for plotting to assassinate a Prime Minister is not "routine." Neither is getting paroled and attacking a police officer with a knife - whereupon Youssef was shot and killed by responding police, so the is no BLP issue.  I created this article.  It passes WP:NCRIME.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:45, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Well sourced. Lasting. 2 events. Attempting to kill a PM is not routine. Nor is being released and going on another attack.Icewhiz (talk) 12:29, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as nominator hasn't followed WP:BEFORE.  Greenbörg  (talk)  10:12, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 7 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per above and due to the fact that this is WP:POV and WP:Point and this user has consistently tried to push an agenda of eliminating coverage of terrorism. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  04:40, 7 September 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.