Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:ALBA-BALAMAND/Wissam Shekhani

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was  delete. — ξ xplicit  01:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

User:ALBA-BALAMAND/Wissam Shekhani
Wissam Shekhani was deleted following Articles for deletion/Wissam Shekhani, and has since been deleted twice more. The article was userfied on 1 December 2009. There is no sign of any intention of restoring this to main space as an article, and only a moderate amount of change has been made in the nine months since userfication. WP:FAKEARTICLE tells us "Userspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles, old revisions, or deleted content", and this userfied article has now passed into this category. (The user is indefinitely blocked.) JamesBWatson (talk) 13:44, 31 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:FAKEARTICLE.  Hi 8 7 8   (Come shout at me!) 16:53, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:Vanity Eli  +  18:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:FAKEARTICLE --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 20:24, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. MER-C 06:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete/ agree. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:43, 1 September 2010 (UTC)


 * ''The following was posted by the (blocked) author of the article to their talk page, with a request that it be copied to here. I think we can take it as a keep. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:15, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I wish if you can read my below clarifications to understand my story cause I really need help here. If all of you are insisting on deleting the page of "WISSAM SHEKHANI"; I can not change your decision and do magic to keep convincing you of keeping it just because I feel like I worked hard for 2 years on that page; I thought I can keep the page in my user till any time I decide it is final and can be submitted to main space; I really did not know about the limit of time. I wish you keep this page because "WISSAM SHEKHANI" deserves to have a page on Wikipedia for all the works he accomplished. He is from Lebanon, a small country that still in state of war at any time and it is so difficult for intellectuals like "WISSAM SHEKHANI" in Lebanon to get known worldwide under those difficult political and social circumstances. I created his page expecting from the international community like WIKIPEDIA to give him full support; but I was surprised by the difficulties I went through just because I created his page. I was accused that I am "WISSAM SHEKHANI" himself and I am creating my own page !!! although I am not him, I am just a fan of him. I was accused of sockpuppetry and got blocked first time cause I was using 2 accounts without knowing that this was illegal and ; I apologized and stopped using my "vincshekhan" account immediately to correct my mistake; than suddenly someone else called  created an account and edited the same page (I do not know who was he till now !!!) and than got again blocked !!! I tried to defend myself but couldn't prove anything. The Christian intellectuals in Lebanon and all arab world in general are minority and rare and need our full support; their works reflect a mixed oriental-western cultures unique and rare. And that what attracted me to discover WISSAM SHEKHANI inventions, theories and art works. I wish you do not delete his page, instead make it on public (refer to the edit made on "WISSAM SHEKHANI" page dated 5 June 2010 at 9:10 time) this was the final edit ready for public submittal. And in case you insist to delete the page; please consider creating a new page for "WISSAM SHEKHANI" to honor him cause I have seen 100 of other pages on WIKIPEIDA about less notable intellectuals or football players or whatever. People already know about "WISSAM SHEKHANI" in lebanon and other countries and you can find a lot about him online on Google search; please check. I always did what you all asked me to do; I always requested to "unblock" my account ; please help me in this too; cause I consider myself a good contributor to WIKIPEDIA and deserve your help. Thank you for your time. (ALBA-BALAMAND (talk) 12:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC))
 * Delete. Just looks like a vanity article, with no notability shown and no reliable references provided - the references are all self-published, user galleries, facebook, etc. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. The subject could potentially be suitable for an article, but it is too hard to tell due to broken links for sources and the many non-reliable sources.  Refer the author to Alternative outlets.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The following was posted by the (blocked) author of the article to their talk page, with a request that it be copied to here. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 15:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I wish you do not delete "WISSAM SHEKHANI" page, instead please help me to make it on public space by correcting any wrong link reference. One another inportant notice; please refer to the edit made on "WISSAM SHEKHANI" page dated 5 June 2010 at 9:10 time http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:ALBA-BALAMAND/Wissam_Shekhani&oldid=366164463 ; this was the final edit ready for public space; the actual page now was modified by Seb az86556 2 days ago. Thank you for your assitance. (ALBA-BALAMAND (talk) 15:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC))
 * Hi. I sympathize with your position, and I do recognize that people from smaller countries often do not get the recognition they deserve. However, hard though it might be, it is of the essence of an encyclopedia that a subject must be both notable, and shown to be notable according to reliable sources - if we did not have that requirement, anyone would be able to make up anything they wanted and we would have no way of knowing if it was genuine. If you can provide any reliable sources to support the notability of Wissam Shekhani (and you have been given a long time to find them), then that might help save the article. But if you cannot provide such sources, then no amount of pleading will make any difference whatsoever. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Transferred from user talk page by sonia ♫, one more comment from author: Dear all Admins; can you please support and help this issue by making a corrective action to save the page of "WISSAM SHEKHANI" from getting deleted?. Is it possible to keep the page with the valid references back on the page edit made on 5 june 2010? Is it possible to keep the page and tag the top of that page by asking other fans/wikipedians in the future to provide more supportive references to this page? Or is it possible to reduce the information mentioned on this page dated 5 june 2010, keeping only the information that you agree all in concensus to be kept on public space?. Looking for your support without the intention of "pleading". Thank you. (ALBA-BALAMAND (talk) 05:39, 6 September 2010 (UTC))
 * Comment. I've just had a look through all the current references, and they appear to come down as follows...
 * 1-4: autodesk.com, self-published gallery images, of the kind anyone can make
 * 5: Broken link - error 404
 * 6: A comment made by Mr Shekhani - not something about him
 * 7-8: autodesk.com, self-published gallery images
 * 9: A picture uploaded to Wikipedia with his name on, no explanation or context
 * 10-11: Facebook
 * 12-13: Self-published petitions at my-cause.com
 * 14-17: Facebook
 * 18-21: autodesk.com
 * 22-23: Shekhani's own web site, self-published
 * So in short, there isn't one single reliable reference attesting to notabiity. He might be a great guy, he might be very talented, but there is absolutely no evidence of notability shown at all here, sorry. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment (copied from his talk page at his request):Dear Admins; why it is a one Judge decision here? Isn't a discussion page involving all Admins opinions?. Please find below all external references that support "WISSAM SHEKHANI" page: Wissam Shekhani Official Website;Wissam Shekhani Facebook Fans page;Wissam Shekhani University;Wissam Shekhani SAVE International; Thankyou again for your time.(ALBA-BALAMAND (talk) 08:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC))
 * Reply - it is not a one-judge decision: this debate is open to all, not just admins, and seven different editors, as well as the nominator, have already given opinions. A closing administrator will not make a decision based on his own opinion, but will assess the consensus of views expressed here. Those four links are his own website, his facebook page, one that shows he is an alumnus of a university, one that shows he is a member of an organization. None of them do anything to show notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." JohnCD (talk) 14:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * To try to explain a bit more, maybe this would help: I personally have my own web site. I have gallery pages at different image-hosting sites. I could also provide references to show I'm an alumnus of two different universities, and that I'm a member of several academic societies. Further, I'm a commercially published author and I could provide links to my work. However, nobody of any note from any reliable source has ever written a single word about me - and that means I don't get a Wikipedia article. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * PS: Re the "one Judge decision". I'm certainly not trying to be one judge here, I'm just a person trying to help you to understand why this article is almost certain to be deleted, and what is required to justify a biographical article. You asked for someone to review the sources, so I did that for you and tried to explain why none of them is good enough. It doesn't matter how many admins or other editors examine the references - the Wikipedia requirements for WP:N and WP:RS really are quite clear, and you just simply don't understand. Sorry, and best wishes -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:35, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * To re-iterate what others have said above: an admin (not one who has been involved in this discussion) will judge the consensus from this discussion when the 7 days are up. As JohnCD says, AfDs are places where anyone (apart from blocked editors or IPs) can comment - be they an IP editor, an "ordinary" editor, an admin, a bureaucrat, etc. So far, there have been 9 different editors who have commented on whether this page should be deleted or not - including yourself, but excluding, who only made a comment - of which only 2 have been admins. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 15:53, 6 September 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.