Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Youssef


 * 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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 19:37, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Sam Youssef

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

The subject appears to lack clear notability. Independent reliable sources that discuss the topic in depth do not appear to exist to meet WP:GNG / WP:BIO. The article seems promotional (prior to my edits) and based on self-published material with close paraphrasing. Other editors have also previously expressed copyright and sourcing concerns via article hatnotes and comments at User talk:MK882. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 11:21, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Egypt. Shellwood (talk) 11:29, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I wholly agree with most of your comments, including that the article had a promotional tone prior to your edits. But, I also believe that after your edits, the article is almost basically completed. As for notability, the subject is a a scholar with many published papers, and is one of few pioneers in spiritual psychology, the initial reason I published the article, alone with contributing to WikiProject psychology. I also added the St Louis radio interview as a example. As for the copyright concerns, they have been avoided. Lastly, since the article has been given a start eating from two WikiProjects, shouldn't it basically be assessed? MK882 (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * A start rating
 * MK882 (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Such ratings are about the quality of an article and the quantity of content it has, not the notability of the subject. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:20, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * My point exactly. MK882 (talk) 17:27, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I rated it as "start", but as Phil Bridger said, that is no indiciation of notability. Merely publishing papers is not sufficient to show notability, they need to be greatly cited by others. Interviews also aren't very independant as per WP:RELIABLE and are typically WP:PRIMARY sources. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:58, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I can find nothing that indicates that the subject comes anywhere near passing any of the counts of WP:PROF, and the cited university profile describes him as a graduate student, which is nowhere near the level that notable people are usually at. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:18, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I never said they were a professor, but being a pioneer in the spiritual psychological field, a field, that has been investigated by very few to none before the subject, is what makes them notable, and worthy of an article. Also, describing them as a graduate student is inaccurate as they have earned two PhD's previously. MK882 (talk) 17:30, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Their impact on the field of psychology is notable, because of his promotion of the integration of spirituality into psychology. MK882 (talk) 17:32, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * What significant independant sources would you point to show the impact? -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - I see nothing which indicates they meet Wikipedia's definition of notable, as no independent reliable source has decided themselves to write about this person. There is zero indication how they would meet the other possible criteria of WP:PROF. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 17:55, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm not seeing enough to warrant a pass of WP:GNG (but could be convinced otherwise), or WP:NAUTHOR as couldn't see any significant independant reviews. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Most of the links are confirmation of the existence of the school/proof of ordination. The psychology stuff seems to be fringe-based science, or at least how I understand it. Not seeing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 20:58, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Guys, I may have been rather lazy in not finding much evidence of notability (apologies), but after some researching, I have (notice: in Egypt people sometimes use their fathers name as their last name which is why he is listed as Hossam Kamal in the interviews).
 * - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6k2nWsXl_Io (a televised interview with Al-Nil (The Nile, a major Egyptian news channel)
 * - https://youtube.com/nnxJ7yXzHxw (a televised interview with the Egyptian Medical Channel, one of the largest medical channels in Egypt).
 * - https://youtube.com /ESn5cRaA4fQ (another televised interview with the Egyptian Medical Channel, one of the largest medical channels in Egypt). MK882 (talk) 23:13, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * NOTICE: FOR THE SECOND AND THIRD LINKS, I ACCIDENTALLY PUT IN YOUTUBE.COM. IT SHOULD BE YOUTU.BE￼ MK882 (talk) 23:15, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * No .com￼ MK882 (talk) 00:51, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * For some reason, Wikipedia has blacklisted links to the youtu.be domain. The links do seem to work if they are edited. Are the second and third links to the same interview? Are the interviews focused on his own biography and notability, or is he being interviewed about some other topic(s)? —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 02:43, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't know why they blocked it. Anyways, no they are not the same interview, just with the same channel, they were some time later. Yes they discuss his achievements, notability, work in the US, and a traditional aspect to healthcare. MK882 (talk) 14:08, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I hope this is enough evidence of notability, if so, should I cite them in the article? MK882 (talk) 14:09, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Interviews are not considered independent coverage, especially when they are in video form. You need to show he has been written about independently and in depth, or that his papers have had an exceptional impact in his field (through citations). JoelleJay (talk) 16:17, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I heard he has a biography coming up from Marquis Who's Who. Could we keep the article intact until then so we can get more valuable info? MK882 (talk) 21:13, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If the article gets deleted can potentially go to WP:REFUND to request a copy of it if additional sources are found, or possibly move the article to userspace. But Marquis Who's Who is generally not reliable enough to establish notability, as listed on WP:RSP. -Kj cheetham (talk) 21:24, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * So one final question, if the Who's Who article comes out soon in a couple of days, and it lists info which could better establish evidence of notability, could the article remain intact until then? I understand that Who's Who may not be reliable to establish notability alone, doesn't the three interviews I showed, the St Louis radio interview, the Marquis Who's Who article and the information in it much more than enough to establish notability. There has already been a press release of the article, and it contains notable achievements of the subject that may revolutionize the field of psychology. MK882 (talk) 16:54, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * One last thing, I have came across information that the subject has been honored by Harvard Business School as a Business Innovator in the Healthcare Industry, is that also contributive to the evidence of notability? MK882 (talk) 16:57, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, how is Marquis Who's Who not enough evidence of notability, if their policy clearly states: individuals profiled are selected on the basis of current reference value. Factors such as position, noteworthy accomplishments, visibility, and prominence in a field are all ta
 * aken into account during the selection process.
 * oteworthy accomplishments, visibility, and prominence in a field are all
 * aken into account during the selection process. MK882 (talk) 17:01, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Lastly, you stated the subject has to have been written about "independently and in-depth", wouldn't that count for the University of Metaphysics article, which was written by the University as part of an award as a graduate in action (excluding the book ad), and if not wouldn't the Marquis Who's Who article also work as it was written by an independent team of investigative writers who did take info from the subject, but made sure of it to be genuine themselves and investigated it thoroughly before including it, while adding their own views to the article? MK882 (talk) 17:06, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Whoever closes this discussion will decide the outcome, based on what's been said here. Regarding Marquis Who's Who, I'm not personally familar at all, but if you go to WP:RSP and search for "Marquis Who's Who" you should find the reasoning along with links to previous discussions. It something "may revolutionize" a field, but hasn't yet, then it WP:TOOSOON as Wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTAL ball. If you've got a web link regarding the Harvard Business School honor for people to look at it won't do any harm. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:15, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This is the digital portion of the honor, which is the certification process.
 * https://courses.edx.org/certificates/9a9e8ad9504b4db3899916ff8f0353e4 MK882 (talk) 20:31, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That's just for completing an online course it looks like (I'm assuming https://www.edx.org/course/innovating-in-health-care-2), and so wouldn't really count towards notability at all. How did you discover this certificate? do you have any connections to Sam Youssef? -Kj cheetham (talk) 20:48, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Nope, it was on their LinkedIn page. MK882 (talk) 13:22, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Marquis Who's Who cannot contribute to notability because it is not independent (entries are written or at least edited by the subjects) and has no demonstrable standard for inclusion. There are also concerns of paid promotion and reliability. The University of Metaphysics is a scam school that awards fake degrees, so is not reliable, and anyway articles about a subject published by the subject's own school are obviously not independent. JoelleJay (talk) 00:32, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * there is no such thing called fake degrees, I am really disappointed to hear that from you, metaphysical psychology was adopted by great psychologists and psychiatrists such as Carl Jung and William James, please read and educate yourself before you comment!!! MK882 (talk) 01:49, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * MK882, please WP:AFG. University of Metaphysics appears to not be accredited. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:42, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Of course fake degrees exist. More importantly, how did you come to hear that the subject has a biography coming up from Marquis Who's Who? Not that it is a reliable source anyway, but the fact that you heard of this seems to indicate a conflict of interest. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:09, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I just think that indicates because of how desperate I was to not get all my work deleted, I checked out their social media platforms where they wrote about this.
 * Also, would this work? https://www.24-7pressrelease.com/press-release/492351/hossam-sam-youssef-phd-psythd-celebrated-for-dedication-to-the-field-of-psychology MK882 (talk) 13:15, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If Marquis Who's Who is not considered an independent reliable source for establishing notability for Mr Youssef, then a press release by Marquis Who's Who does not seem like a reliable source for establishing notability for Mr Youssef either. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 14:20, 28 June 2022 (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.