Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anis Hamadeh
- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 12:36, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
| Advanced search for: "Anis Hamadeh" | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
The article is the work of an single purpose account User:Sschlange, Hamadehs flatmate and friend, so Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Hamadeh is author of only one book with an rank of 150.000 at amazon.de and translator of another one. His poems are only published on his own website, his CDs are published by himself, former webmaster of a NGO, one exhibition together with his flatmate and one for his own (both in irrelevant galleries). Most of the sources are his own website or his flatmates and so neither neutral nor reliable. The Article is orphanised for more than six months and gets an average of 2 hits per day. The article is full of irrelevances and name dropping (Chomsky says thanks by mail for being mentioned in a poem…). The Article on Hamadeh has been deleted in wikipedia.de for this reasons de:Wikipedia:Löschkandidaten/25. November 2010#Anis Hamadeh (gelöscht) Maybe the criteria for notability are not the same in the German and English wikipedia, but that deletion indicates Hamadehs irrelevance: Not even in his own land he seems to be important --Feliks (talk) 08:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It looks marginal to me. He has been interviewed in an American publication here and a British one here (note that this latter image is hosted by the subject's girlfriend, but the publication it replicates is independent), and his book is reviewed by a German publication here, so there's some evidence of sources on which to base a fixed version of the article. Are these sources strong enough to justify a BLP? It's arguable but personally I'm not convinced that they are.—S Marshall T/C 15:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 18:00, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete no indication of notability given in the article, doesnt meet criteria for various subjects, such as author, musician, activist. the german WP article was deleted, which would have been of some significance, as his one clear claim to notability is having published a book. (ps this is NOT in any way a critique of the man or his work, in case anyone worries about that)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:49, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per both. Johnbod (talk) 04:30, 17 December 2010 (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.