Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wafah Dufour


 * 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. Big Dom  08:56, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Wafah Dufour

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Although there has been significant coverage of Wafah Dufour, it is my opinion that she is not notable enough to be included in Wikipedia. For better or for worse, her claim to fame is that she is related to Osama Bin Laden. As a singer/songwriter, she is unsigned and has not released a record. As a reality TV star, her show was never produced. I'm not sure what would constitute notability as a model. If a person has significant coverage, we presume there is notability, but I think that she falls into the category of What Wikipedia Is Not. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Bin Laden had very many relatives. Do we need to have an article for each one? I'd say her mother, who also has an article about her, is arguably more notable due to the fact that she wrote a book. Which brings me to me next point: Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Perhaps Wafah Dufour will become notable in the future, but it is equally possible that her first album will never come to fruition. Extrapolating from this phrase, "In particular, if reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having a biographical article on that individual," my feeling is that we should delete the article. I look forward to hearing others' views. GentlemanGhost (talk) 15:56, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Although I am not sure what Wafah has accomplished as a singer, model or other entertainment personality, she does appear to have received a significant amount of publicity throughout the world, over a period of several years, for her efforts to publicize herself in those occupations. See this Google News Search, which on the first page of results alone shows mentions of her in English-, Spanish-, French-, Turkish-, Portuguese-, Vietnamese-, and German-language media. It is true that Osama Bin Laden had something like 300 nieces and nephews. However, most of them don't seek the public spotlight and are not mentioned in the media. Wafah has sought out the public spotlight and received it to some extent. The fact that she is still receiving some publicity more than eight years after she started to receive publicity indicates that there is continuing interest in her, even if she has not achieved stardom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your thoughts! You raise a good point. My question is, does publicity equate with notability? I definitely think there are enough reliable sources which have written about her, but despite that, I'm not sure it justifies her inclusion. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 17:39, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * We are not supposed to echo or initiate tabloid-style sensational coverage of individuals. But, what does it mean if we were to decide that coverage was mere publicity?  Wouldn't that require us to make decisions based on our personal POV, in violation of WP:NPOV?  In Wafah Dufour's case there is sufficient coverage of her, on a variety of topics, to flesh out an article.  You mention OBL having 300 nieces and nephews.  Given that he had close to five dozen half-siblings he may have even more than 300 400 relatives.  And we wouldn't even consider starting articles about ninety percent of them because we wouldn't have sufficient reliable sources to provide meaningful coverage.  Consider this article on OBL's relatives, written after his death.  It mentions just 3 of those 300 -- including Wafah Dufour.  I don't think there is any question that she is within the small subset of OBL's relatives who merit an individual article.  Geo Swan (talk) 18:29, 2 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep -- If, for the sake of argument, this article were deleted, where should the information about Wafah Dufour be shoe-horned? Our nominator has acknowledged, in the nomination, that Wafah Dufour has been the subject of extensive news coverage, on multiple topics.  The Wafah Dufour article is the intersection of multiple topics, including: (1) notable relatives of OBL; (2) fashion models; (3) singer-songwriters; (4) reality TV.  Readers interested in any of those topics may want to read more about Wafah Dufour.  It would be a disservice to our readers to force the information about her to be shoe-horned into other articles on any of those topics.  Geo Swan (talk) 18:17, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep -- extensive media coverage = notabililty (importance on the other hand ... but that has no relevance at AFD) Agathoclea (talk) 20:43, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Geo Swan. bd2412  T 15:32, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Does publicity = notability? Um ... well, yes.  It does.  The GNG holds that someone is presumed notable if she has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."  It doesn't pass judgment as to why the media has decided to accord the subject notice.   ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  19:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: "Significant coverage" is, in fact, one of the central facets of notability. This is not one event, nor is she covered merely for being only one of many relatives to Bin Laden. Roger Clinton, Jr. would not have gotten an article but for his relationship to Bill Clinton, but the "significant coverage" criterion was reached. Wafah likewise garners similar treatment. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:44, 5 July 2011 (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.