Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salem Ahmed Hadi

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. Closing as keep after new sources were added to the article (non-admin closure) —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 10:36, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Salem Ahmed Hadi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This has been in CAT:NN for over 11 years; hopefully we can now resolve it one way or another. He has plenty of small mentions, but I don't see that he meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG for a stand-alone article. Can't identify a good WP:ATD but open to ideas. Boleyn (talk) 10:32, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep We don't really know much about the Guantanamo detainees apart from what is documented about them during their incarceration and eventual transfer. This isn't perhaps the normal kind of coverage we'd look for in a biography but on the other hand there's no question that this group of individuals has received plentiful coverage in multiple reliable sources over an extended period. There maybe a case (which I don't support) for deleting all of them, but I don't see why this one in particular should be singled out. Mccapra (talk) 11:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Yemen-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Saudi Arabia-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Mccapra - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 19:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete people are not made notable by this level of coverage. This is an example of the POV pushing abuse to create directory style articles to publicize issues someone cared about we allowed Wikipedia to be subject to back in the 2000s. We need to stop this starting by removing POV-pushing plan articles like this one.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:18, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I think the sources support notability. Geo Swan (talk) 23:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Per WP:GNG. Per sources. Notability isnt temporary.BabbaQ (talk) 09:26, 7 August 2020 (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.