Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Osama Abdallah

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Osama Abdallah

Article is not built from independent, reliable sources (WP:V), and does not explain how it meets the notability guidelines (WP:Bio) - level of activity is not an indication of notability. Oo7565 (talk) 17:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article is very POV. No assertion of notability, nor evidence of notability can be found. Number of websites owned or managed is not an indication of notability. Delete. Theseeker4 (talk) 19:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep There's a possibility for an adequate article here. DGG (talk) 19:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject doesn't meet the GNG and this is an inadequately referenced BLP. RMHED (talk) 22:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article needs a lot of work, but there is enough there to eventually improve it.2008Olympian^chitchat 08:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 21:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 21:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 21:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think that he's done enough to be worthy of inclusion. So far as sourcing and verifiability is concerned, this article needs work, not deletion. - Richard Cavell (talk) 01:03, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as notability is not established. Boston (talk) 02:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable with no reliable sources. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 03:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Issues with WP:BIO, also, if we keep, we should do some serious cleanup about the spamminess. Ray (talk) 05:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Question I see a grand total of 15 references, with at least half of them not related to him. How are they not reliable? - Mgm|^(talk) 09:16, 8 December 2008 (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.