Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yasir Afifi


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:11, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Yasir Afifi

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I've read the story this morning, and yes it does check out, but I'd go for "one event"... the guy hasn't done anything else in his life that could make him notable. The case can be described elsewhere once more becomes known. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:59, 18 October 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This news is the first in the fight for privacy protections. UC Hastings Law Professor Rory Little of the opinion that Afifi's case is headed for the Supreme Court show that this is not the last you hear about it. (Not my personal opinion, mind you.) Also the case is being taken by Civil liberties-focused Council on American Islamic Relations who will ensure the fight goes on. Yosri (talk) 09:14, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You misunderstood. I'm not asking how a potential case could become notable, I don't see how the person could be notable. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:16, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying he got potential, but he already the first case that highlight FBI monitoring based on racial profiling - male muslim, travel a lot. He is not the first, one among many, but first to get highlighted. Anyway, I'm not asking you to reply, it just my argument to keep the article for other's voters. Keep cool.  Yosri (talk) 09:29, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know what is the speed US legislation process, but while wating for the verdict, I create Yasir Afifi touching on Big Brother tactic. The article can be redirect to ie. "Afifi vs. the United States of America 2020" at later stage. Yosri (talk) 11:45, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * very weak delete The problem in this case is that the incident happened quite recently and may or may not have larger ramifications; the larger story simply hasn't had time to develop. It could possibly be merged into some article on US warrant requirements for surveillance. Mangoe (talk) 15:46, 25 October 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.