Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arnoud van Doorn

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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:16, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arnoud van Doorn

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

Not notable. Arnoud van Doorn is an obscure Dutch politician whose main notability is his conversion from being anti-Muslim to becoming a Muslim. References mainly repeat the same story almost word for word. Jason from nyc (talk) 13:57, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:41, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:41, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:42, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep per WP:BIO1E, I would not consider him a "low-profile" individual per WP:LPI so he avoids the WP:BLP1E concern. Roberticus talk 15:32, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - adequately sourced, with good English-language coverage (which points to him not being so obscure for a Dutch politician), and as above. Eustachiusz (talk) 00:19, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There has been coverage of the subject sustained for about a year now, and he still seems to be in the public eye. Seems to pass WP:POLITICIAN per criterion 2 in addition to the WP:GNG. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:40, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep His primary notability stems from a single event, but the coverage is longer lasting and he continues to have impact. Passes WP:BIO1E and maybe WP:POLITICIAN . -- Jersey92 (talk) 04:48, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As councillor for the Freedom Party, and then the Islam Democrats, he received - and keeps receiving - media coverage, both domestically and internationally (for example in a short documentary by Vice which followed him campaigning for reelection this year). His habit of courting such coverage (most recently by criticizing a fellow Muslim party for being too gay-friendly, and by being sentenced in court for leaking secret documents and selling drugs to minors), will likely keep people turning to Wikipedia to find more information about him. If he was the (co-?)producer of Fitna, as the Wikipedia article says, that's an additional reason to keep it, since the film was notable and (for better or worse) influential, provoking world-wide reactions. No-itsme (talk) 13:55, 28 May 2014 (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.