Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-Zaghab

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. clear consensus--no bar to re-creation with adequate sourcing. DGG ( talk ) 04:11, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Zaghab

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

NN alleged Arabic "clan," no sources proffered. Unimproved in a decade The article was AfDed nine years ago with a bundle of similar ones, and in one of those brutal decisions common to the era closed as a keep based on the pious hope of the keep proponents that sources might eventually appear.

My comment from that AfD was "These articles represent the sole contribution to Wikipedia of User:Phsychyzed, of which he says of himself on his talk page 'Phsychyzed is a nickname created by child and has now risen to be one of the most famous "nicknames" in use on the internet.Nobody really knows what the nickname resembles but ofcourse many have given the simplest of guess where phsychy means crazy and zed just being the alphabet letter.' The earliest of these articles is over a year old now, and at no point has any attempt to improve most of them been made. Right now the only info I'm seeing on the web refers to (a) these articles and their mirrors, (b) repeated blogging by a Jordanian teenager named Al Zeitawi looking for pen pals; and (c) a business by that name in Abu Dhabi. There are no verifiable sources for this info, not a single one. I understand that people want to bend over backwards to be Arab-friendly here, but I strongly suspect WP:HOAX at this point."

No newer sources substantiating any of the information in the article have turned up since, and the article remains unimproved in all that time. Fails the GNG, but then again it always did. Ravenswing 06:46, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:50, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:50, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is unfortunate that Arabic transliterations are not conducive to something that can be standardized into a Latin script, hence skewing our search return numbers. That however, does not diminish the actual content as I can verify as an Arabic speaker. Hawaan12 (talk) 06:47, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Happily, the sources you added are English language ones, and none of them mention the subject in other than a fleeting reference. The Savage book you cite gives this as its sum reference: "The Hilalian clans of Diyat, 'Araq, Zaghab and others spread over Ifriqiya like locusts." The Burton reference is a footnote defining Zaghab as Arabic for "the chick's down." You cite the title of the Hephaestus book, but perhaps you overlooked the part where the Google Books review states "To date, this content has been curated from Wikipedia articles and images under Creative Commons licensing, although as Hephaestus Books continues to increase in scope and dimension, more licensed and public domain content is being added." This cannot stand as a reliable source, and I'm removing it. Would you like to proffer any reliable sources that meet WP:SIGCOV? Ravenswing 07:40, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:35, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:35, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't find enough coverage in RSs to meet WP:NOTABILITY in either English or Arabic. One passing mention cited in the article is not enough. Eperoton (talk) 14:09, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete at best as the current article is actually not better convincing of any applicable notability and this could be Drafted at best only if needed for future uses. SwisterTwister talk 05:15, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:39, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for reasons given by nom. I gave sourcing a shot, and found exactly what Nom and Eperoton found: mirrors of this antique Wikipedia page. No prejudice if against a new page if substantive sources can be produced. Although note that major Arab clans are not hard to source pages for: Nashashibi clan, Atassi family, we have many such sell-sourced pages.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:06, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Searches, as with other editors, turned up zero to show the notability of this subject. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:18, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not enough reliable sources to assert notability and none on the web either — Omni Flames (talk contribs) 08:00, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.