Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Hamad

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 Hamad

(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 06:54, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:48, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:48, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge with Al-Zeitawi. It is unfortunate that Arabic transliterations are not easily 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) 06:55, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: What "content?" There are no sources listed here. You've cut-and-pasted this response to all the "clan" articles I AfDed, which leads me to question whether you've sought reliable sources for some of these at all. If you have, where are they? Ravenswing 07:45, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't find any coverage in either English or Arabic RSs. Eperoton (talk) 14:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as none of this suggests solid notability and there's nothing to suggest this is an improvable article. SwisterTwister talk 05:24, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as old, vague article with no sources. Searches do produce hits on Al Hamad as a contemporary surname. And references to clans of this name in various parts of the Arab world. But this article makes claims such as "Al Hamad (الحمد) is an old Arabic tribe who live in the village of Jammain" and my search on "Al Hamad" + "Jammain" comes up empty, except for mirrors of this article. Better to have no page than a page spreading information that cannot be validated. No prejudice against re-creation if someone can source a proper article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:15, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Like al-Zeitawi, this is probably not a hoax article, but should be deleted because it can't be verified and quite frankly, even if we could verify that the family exists, it would probably fail WP notability guidelines. This goes for all the supposed sub-branches of the Zeitawi clan. --Al Ameer (talk) 19:37, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Couldn't find anything to substantiate that this subject passes WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:11, 12 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.