Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samir Altaqi

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 no consensus. $Salvio$ ^{Let's talk about it!} 09:40, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Samir Altaqi

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

~~A very marginal claim of notability, with no third party reliable sources.~~ Rob (talk) 06:02, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:54, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:54, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:55, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:55, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No pass of WP:Prof. is there anything else? Xxanthippe (talk) 23:00, 7 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Delete fails WP:PROF. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:53, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep His name appears to be Samir al-Taqi and there appear to be a number of sources indicating clear notability WP:GNG [1], [2], [3]. I think the problem is simply getting the name wrong, so the article should be moved to "Samir al-Taqi."

Thanks for the info. His name gets spelled both ways. However multiple in-depth sources are required and there are not enough here. Xxanthippe (talk) 07:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]

There are multiple in-depth sources. I have no idea how many. Besides articles in English, there are probably dozens in Arabic. This BBC article asserts his notability as do others: "Dr Samir al-Taqi is a prominent Syrian intellectual." The Washington Post article is entirely about him. That and other articles are sufficient for WP:GNG. I am One of Many (talk) 07:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now You've convinced me to take back my request for deletion. I think it's fair to give the article some time to improve. When I first saw it, it seemed like a run-of-the-mill vanity article. But, now, it seems that he may be a notable opinion maker. But, to keep the article in the long term, somebody needs to invest the time to add sources to the article, and improve it substantially. --Rob (talk) 07:54, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 17:56, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relist rationale: Allowing a bit more discussion of the sources raised. --j⚛e decker ^talk 17:59, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as above fails PROF. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 22:06, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:PROF #1 and #7 as an academic who's frequently hailed as an expert and widely quoted in the media. As well as above sources[4][5][6] This book has 2 pages on his role as an envoy for the Syrian government.[7]. So he seems to meet WP:GNG as well. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:54, 15 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.