Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sargon Dadesho


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 09:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Sargon Dadesho

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The subject of this article has requested at OTRS 2010012310027541 that it be deleted as a vandalism/libel magnet; possibly doesn't meet WP:BIO. No opinion from me. Stifle (talk) 10:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 00:43, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'm on the fence with regards to notability, but if there is an OTRS ticket why can't we just indefinitely semi-protect this article until the pipedream of flagged revisions becomes a reality?  Seriously. JBsupreme (talk) 20:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep This article needs to be improved, not deleted (but well outside my field of expertise) 7triton7 (talk) 11:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. He appears to be notable.  As for the vandalism/libel magnet, we can't just go around deleting the articles for controversial figures - otherwise what would we have to do with Barack Obama or Ben Bernanke?  If it suffers vandalism/libel, you can always request protection at WP:AIV. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 22:04, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 02:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep - just adding my vote to build consensus. Agree completely with the above comments on need for improvement rather than deletion, and the possible need for protection. D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 02:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep now that there is sourced negative material, that is when he wants it deleted. The article's present language needs some revision for NPOV and tone.    DGG ( talk ) 05:09, 10 February 2010 (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.