Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sami Elmansoury


 * 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 per consensus that there exists insufficient reliable sources. Shereth 20:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Sami Elmansoury

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Does not meet WP:BIO notability criteria. Nearly all sources of notability are from a student newspaper. The New York Times article simply quotes the individual on a particular issue. OhNo itsJamie Talk 11:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The concern here is understandable, and the notability criteria was reviewed repeatedly prior to posting this article. This individual has had a strong, lasting, and continuing impact on his community, and on the State of New Jersey. He has worked heavily on political affairs throughout the State, has aided the Obama for America campaign, and is currently working on the Jon Corzine 2009 campaign. These items are not listed in this biography BECAUSE they are not verifiable through media coverage. The individual in question has in fact met and spoken with Barack Obama, Joseph Biden, several Senators in Congress, Jon Corzine, and many other notable political figures. The use of a student newspaper here should not be belittled, as this paper publication reaches over 40,000 students, thousands more Deans, Professors, etc., and even more people via its online publication, around the tristate area. The use of the New York Times article is to partially prove this individual's status as a community leader, as he was contacted directly for his perspective on a national issue. It is not justifiable to delete an article simply because that individual is not particularly "famous" and perhaps not as well-known to date as Bill Gates or Barack Obama. But there are several articles on Wikipedia that are about individuals who are not particularly well-known and far less so than the individual in question, yet have had some impact on their communities.  Some of these articles, unlike the one in question, lack citations and have not been flagged for deletion. Some are about figures who have had no impact on the community but who may be particularly wealthy.  If this is the criteria that Wikipedia is using to delete important articles, then it is not a reference for the people and those who have worked in notable ways to better their communities. The individual here is well-known, notable, and continues to work hard on behalf of immigrant communities and Americans who have or are facing anti-Semitism and discrimination. It is urged that you do not delete this page. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikise (talk • contribs)  — Wikise (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment Verifiability is a core policy of Wikipedia. Meetings famous people and being briefly quoted by a newspaper are not among the WP:BIO criteria. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 20:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Thank you. But this is not about the chance happening of meeting "famous people." It is about working alongside their efforts and linking them to the wider communities, particularly in the State of New Jersey. It is also about the individual being a prominent speaker, with a staff, who has traveled and spoken at several conferences across the country. Even so, media attention is absolutely important, but not the only standard for notability. By your own definition and criteria, the actions of the individual are very important. In reading the other reasons for other articles that have been flagged, it was made clear that many are relatives of notable people, or are self-promoters for business reasons, etc. This is an encyclopedic article about an individual who is by himself notable. It is not about a link to someone else, nor is it self-promotion for profit. It is simply an article about a well-known individual in the State of New Jersey. Go to Yahoo.com, begin typing in the name, and it will auto-complete. That is how often the person in question has been searched online. It is also highly notable in New Jersey and the surrounding areas that the individual in question was the first-ever recipient of an award granted by a major educational institute, for religious tolerance and actions in that regard. This is stated, and verified, in the article via a government-funded university website.


 * The individual in question will be speaking at a major conference this July in Washington, D.C., hence the creation of the article for biographical purposes. Once again, his participation in the said conference is verified in the references section of the article.


 * In addition, the Wikipedia page on verifiability is introduced as follows:


 * "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed."


 * Regardless of the use of a major student newspaper, or the New York Times, or a conference site, or a television network, everything in this biographical article is not only truth, but is verified as per the policy and unlike many, many pages on Wikipedia that once again have not been flagged for deletion.


 * It is once again urged that this article not be deleted. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikise (talk • contribs)


 * Delete, I don't see the sustained coverage by multiple reliable sources that is required by WP:BIO. Nyttend (talk) 21:05, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment "Based largely upon his deeply-rooted belief in the value of American diversity, Elmansoury has indulged himself in the study of politics"? No. That's for an election address or other self-promotional material. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. It is not for promotional material. (In case anyone is thinking of saying, "But Fred Bloggs's article is promotional", that's not an excuse for this one. If Fred is promotional, do us all a favour and nominate it here at AfD.) While I am hopeful that we will hear more of him, this article as it stands is not suitable. It needs more solid info. Being interviewed is not much. Why was he interviewed? Where are the independent references? (Student publications can be used, but more solid and reliable stuff is needed as well.) Get rid of the adulation and get down to facts. I'm not saying keep or delete yet. Waiting to see... Peridon (talk) 21:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC) (Please sign posts with four ~ things to get a proper sig. Ta.)


 * Comment The phrase mentioned above is not by any means promotional. It is simply the culmination of the individual's studies and efforts. If the wording is somewhat "graceful," that is simply because the author took the time to make the article as professional as the Wikipedia editors expect. The content is biographical and was specifically written to keep the expected neutrality in mind. If you can suggest specific ways to improve this article, that would certainly be taken very well by the editor. As for the use of multiple, reliable sources, there are several different sources that contribute to this individual's background in leadership. The references listed are in no way questionable, nor are they small-time sources. This seems both clear and certain. Deletion of an article is based upon what has been mentioned - lack of verifiability, lack of notability, self-promotion, etc. This article not only verifies itself, but it is about a notable New Jersey figure. And it is a far stretch away from self-promotion, as the individual himself would not accept self-promotional websites or anything that goes beyond biography on this site. Your thoughts are appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikise (talk • contribs)


 * Keep the provided references are reliable and verifiable Rirunmot (talk) 23:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment According to the basic criteria of WP:BIO: If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be needed to prove notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability. The references provided (other than a student newspaper) do not include non-trivial coverage. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 23:51, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment With great respect, in greater detail, the "non-triviality clause" states the following: "Non-triviality is a measure of the depth of content of a published work, and how far removed that content is from a simple directory entry or a mention in passing that does not discuss the subject in detail. A credible 200-page independent biography of a person that covers that person's life in detail is non-trivial, whereas a birth certificate or a 1-line listing on an election ballot form is not. Database sources such as Notable Names Database, Internet Movie Database and Internet Adult Film Database are not considered credible since they are, like wikis, mass-edited with little oversight. Additionally, these databases have low, wide-sweeping generic standards of inclusion."
 * Not one reference included in this article is trivial, as per the description of triviality above. Beyond The Daily Targum, links included in the references section are from highly credible organizations and websites, and include biographies, conference publications, seminar information, etc. Regardless, the "student newspaper" references are in the minority, NOT in the majority. Nor are any of the included references "in passing" mentions of the subject. They are thus far from trivial, by our own standards at Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.73.202.218 (talk)


 * Delete At first glance the article appears to have the feel of a curriculum vitae. For being an outspoken activist, writer, and orator he seems to not be well known.  The article was primarily written by a single author who has also been the one commenting here without signing. rmosler (talk) 06:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Puff piece that doesn't meet WP:BIO. The sources given don't meet standards at WP:RS. I suspect that this article is just another part of the "activism" that the subject endorses, whether or not he is directly involved in it. --  At am a chat 16:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment It has been proven, several times, that this piece meets the biographical standards outlined by Wikipedia. So this should bear no effect on the decision of whether to delete it or to keep it. I don't know about it being signed or unsigned, but my user name does show up every time I post. I have not intentionally left the posts unsigned. The subject is indeed an outspoken activist and everything that the article indicates. He is a close friend to our community and does not seek fame, but rather action. If you have not heard of him, that is likely due to your distance from the area, or for other reasons. Frankly, in looking over the list of "living persons" on Wikipedia, there are THOUSANDS of legitimate entries that few have "heard of", yet they meet Wikipedia's standards and they are and should be kept on Wikipedia. Thanks.
 * Comment It is absurd to see the urgency to delete this entry. It is not offensive to anyone, it certainly meets Wikipedia's standards, and it presents the positive impact that a certain active and prominent individual has had on the larger community. It has the ability to inspire many young people who can have a similar impact of their own. In the comments above, not once has there been made a productive suggestion on how to simply IMPROVE this article. If one can take the time and make the effort to say "delete", it is very likely that one can utilize the same effort to say "improve." That is how Wikipedia operates. It is not a "quick to delete" forum, it is about informing each other about different people, history, science, the arts, and the like. If every entry that is based upon a "less famous" individual is deleted, then Wikipedia would become no different than celebrity websites and "mainstream" tabloid journalism. What a shame.
 * Reply - The article isn't being proposed for deletion because it needs improvement. It is being proposed for deletion because the subject fails Wikipedia's notability standards. This is an objective evaluation based on the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Basically, you need more than one reliable source to cover him at length. Lengthy coverage from a student newspaper, or a brief blurb in the New York Times don't qualify; the former is not a reliable source and the latter is not significant coverage. I also have a real problem when you said above, "The individual in question will be speaking at a major conference this July in Washington, D.C., hence the creation of the article for biographical purposes." If you are creating this article to promote this individual in advance of the conference, please rethink your strategy. --  At am a chat 18:50, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Your name may appear to you, but you need to use the four ~ s at the end of a post here so we can see it. There are a lot of people with articles on Wikipedia that I haven't heard of. That doesn't make me think they are not notable - it just makes me look at the reference, and if there isn't much it makes me search to see if there is anything in some cases. It's not about degrees of fame. I've not decided yet whether to say Keep, Delete, or Toss a Coin. I think there might be notability - if you can establish it to Wikipedia's standards. If you don't like Wikipedia's standards, then feel free to start your own encyclopaedia. I've not had much time to investigate fully (48 hours work in 4 days...). However, most of what I've just flicked through on a Gsearch (oh, these Wikipedia buzzwords...) seems to be not what we are looking for. http://www.njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/031606/njJewishMuslim.html has a mention of him as a founder of HDP - but it's only a mention. You've got more time - DIG for victory! And tone down the puffy tone of the wording as exemplified in my post way above. Here, we're sales resistant. We seek facts - and reliably (by our standards) backed up facts. I'm trying to encourage you, not damn you. I'd rather see an article turned round than deleted. When I have time, I'll dig for an article whose subject I consider worthy. Sometimes I lose. At the moment, you have more time. Get going! Peridon (talk) 18:09, 26 June 2009 (UTC) (signed with four Peridon (talk) thingies)


 * 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.