This is a collection of discussions on the deletion and merging of articles related to Middle East. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion and neither does removing an AfD from this page remove it from the main page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:deletion sorting|Middle East|sig=~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Middle East. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Unsustainable list because there is no universally accepted definition of Middle East. For example, this does not include the South Caucasus. It also doesn't include Libya and Afghanistan which are often included.
There is also no universally accepted definition of a city so we may be including suburbs in the case of some of these listings but not in the case of others. Estimates for one city will differ by population for this reason. This is not a problem in lists by-nation because these nations usually designate their own criteria for what they consider a city.
If needed, such lists should be on more widely accepted geographic terms like West Asia, Central Asia, North Africa, etc. JaneFootball (talk) 14:27, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
Keep Not a convincing argument for deletion. First, I never heard Libya or Caucasus counted as the Middle East, so not sure how that is relevant. More importantly, and more broadly, the argument that any concept for which there is not 100% consensus should be deleted is hardly productive. If we feel there is enough uncertainty about the exact definition of the geographical region, then we can address that in the text of the article. The content itself is relevant. Jeppiz (talk) 14:31, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
Then it will be duplicative of similar lists for Asia, Africa, and Europe (for Cyprus). WP:OVERLAP applies but I don't think any information should be merged because there's not that much information already JaneFootball (talk) 14:38, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
It seems as if you are changing the goalposts here. First you nominate it for deletion with one argument, and when that one is countered you jump to a completely different one. Neither is a reason for deletion. Jeppiz (talk) 14:49, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
Keep There are lots of articles/lists about metro areas and about the Middle East, but the lack of a universal definition of those has not proven to be a problem with those. I see no reason to delete. Reywas92Talk 18:28, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
Well, a list for the Americas would not have any WP:OVERLAP concerns. Perhaps it could be split into North and South, but that is not a concern warranting deletion. But this list having overlap with a possible European, African, and Asian list would mean that this list warrants deletion JaneFootball (talk) 12:25, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
Keep The scope of Middle East seems relatively stable, e.g. there's been a long-standing Wikipedia consensus that Afghanistan is not included. The list members all meet the criteria of the scope as well as being a metropolitan area with over 1.5 million. The first column matches the data given in the first reference, which is as of January 2026. The second column could maybe use some work on source/referencing. I would also note that this list is linked to by numerous city articles, amongst others. Declangi (talk) 04:04, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
Provisionally delete because I don't see any indication that this passes WP:NLIST, either from the article or a quick search. Samuelshraga (talk) 10:41, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
The population is 0 per the 2016 census. This suggests that the Iranian census reform (started counting from larger subdivisions) makes this place not notable. source for 2016 population is farsi wikipedia JaneFootball (talk) 14:12, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
Keep notability is not temporary and government-recognized legal entity villages are notable - doesn't matter about population now If this is in fact an abadi, then Delete. Jishara (please ping upon response) (talk) 15:50, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
WP:NGEO says that abadis don't automatically pass and this is an abadi JaneFootball (talk) 16:07, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
Delete Per WP:ABADI. Jishara has misunderstood the nature of this place, which is an Abadi, not a village. It is part of a set of articles mass-created by desysopped, retired admin Carlossuarez46, who thought he understood Persian but in fact obviously did not, as can be seen by the large number of location-names they mistranslated, including articles for "villages" with names like "Radar site", "pump", "dam", "barracks", "Agro-Industry" and so-forth. I think the worst of these was the supposed "July 7 International Airport", every word of which was a mistranslation/wrong/misunderstanding. In this case دره جا (Darreh Ja) machine-translates simply as "valley". The location is a small farmed valley without any extant buildings within it, so it is clearly not a village but instead just a valley. The population is too low for this place to have received official village status in Iran at any point - it never has been an officially recognised village. The Iranian census does not confer any legal status on localities simply by listing them as an abadi - many of them have no population, or are farms/factories/pumps/mills/barracks/schools/shops/cafes (etc. etc. etc.).
More than 20,000 of these Iranian "village" articles created by Carlossuarez46 have been deleted, but tens of thousands of PAG-failing articles remain, and it really is past time we dealt with them en bloc. FOARP (talk) 09:57, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
I think that the ones that are about real villages should stay. I agree with you that most of these rural farms, barracks, shops, etc. are not notable, but we may have some good content in the articles that Carlos made. JaneFootball (talk) 10:16, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
Articles that have been improved since C46 created them, and which now have additional sourcing that isn't the census, I have no complaints about. But I have doubts about articles about "villages" for which we have no real information of their existence other than the 2006 Iranian census and some place-names on GEONet Names Server (an unreliable source). We don't even really know whether C46 was properly cross-referencing the Iranian census with the place-names - often GNS provides multiple names for a place, and the Iranian census does not include co-ordinates, so how did he know that the place in the census was really the same one as on GNS?
I mean the guy literally created an article about an international airport that didn't exist, and mistranslated the name of the place to boot. And it's not only places with small populations that have turned out to be imaginary: one of the articles deleted via PROD (Sinai and Gulf Corner Centre) had a population of roughly 60,000 listed in the census, but simply never existed as an actual place as far as anyone could actually determine. FOARP (talk) 11:55, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
Wow, I do not know that Carlos's articles were that bad. But I still think that a WP:BEFORE should be done. Mass-nominations may hinder that. Perhaps nominations by geographic subdivision could be made after a community WP:BEFORE at some forum (perhaps WT:IRANJaneFootball (talk) 12:23, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
It's impossible to do WP:BEFORE on all these articles. Even just a few minutes checking per articles means spending years and years on it. It is unnecessary also, since the time taken to create each of them was literally seconds: you don't need to individually check the creation of something that zero thought was put into in the first place. For example, on the same day he created Darreh Ja, Carlossuarez46 created at least 117 other articles - I say "at least" because the articles deleted so far won't show up in this search.
Delete per WP:ABADI, no indication that this was ever a WP:GEOLAND passing locality. Giulio 14:23, 21 October 2026 (UTC)
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. Salviogiuliano 19:30, 20 October 2026 (UTC)
Delete - better merge/redirect target is probably List of programs broadcast by Spacetoon, which already appears to list what "planet" each show was associated with, and is more complete. Omphalographer (talk) 02:39, 13 October 2026 (UTC)
Delete, entirely in-universe plot details with no indication of standalone notability. ScalarFactor (talk) 16:59, 18 October 2026 (UTC)
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.
Keep: First, I want to restore the context that User:Sunfyre has omitted through classic Decontextualisation and a straw man argument. I previously warned User:Oshwah on their talk page about a group of Persian Wikipedia users who engage in censorship and sabotage of anti-regime articles and target anti-regime contributors. They censor and sabotage anti-regime (especially pro-Pahlavi) articles on Persian Wikipedia, and this is not an isolated incident. As an immediate example, they in Persian Wikipedia, recently brought Yasmine Pahlavi up for deletion despite multiple reliable sources and citations. They also deleted Noor Pahlavi, which had to be restored after years of fighting these censorship attempts, despite having enough reliable sources. In this case, after a Persian Wikipedia user’s attempt to place a speedy-deletion tag on my article (in Persian wiki and here), failed due to the lack of grounds under the relevant criteria, they brought it to a deletion discussion and pursued the same outcome on Persian Wikipedia.
The broader context matters: the Islamist regime controls internet access in Iran and has an organized and systematic campaign to influence online platforms, including Wikipedia. Our situation as Iranian users inside Iran was not the same as that of other users, and we had to overlook certain Wikipedia guidelines (without breaking Wikipedia's rules) to protect our own lives. Persian Wikipedia has been affected by the regime's organized propaganda campaign, including efforts to flood the platform with regime-aligned users in various forms and through the recruitment, coercion, or compromise of editors and administrators.
The very well-known and notorious case of User:Mardetanha even attracted media attention. Following years of suppressing anti-regime contributors (including me) and censoring related articles, he was ultimately banned from the community indefinitely by the Wikimedia Foundation. Some of the blocks User:Sunfyre cites against me were imposed by administrators such as User:Mardetanha himself. At one point, I was blocked for criticizing him, despite having acted within the rules, and was unblocked only after I had to apologize. This history matters when evaluating attempts to use my block record to discredit me or assassinate the character of a user whose work spans years of lasting contributions to Wikipedia across its projects, from his teen age until today.
My many articles and years of valuable contributions to Wikipedia projects were disrupted by Persian Wikipedia administrators such as User:Mardetanha, who suppressed us and either forced us into isolation or left us vulnerable to being targeted or ambushed by their classic 'gotta!' tactics that are classic behavior of the regime agents. Someone needs to put an end to this once and for all. Unfortunately, the Wikimedia foundation failed to protects its users and hold such bad actors accountable sooner and for years such admins and users succeeded to sabotage and disrupt Wikipedia projects and abuse their administration access to suppress and isolate anti-regime and pro-Pahlavi users.
I also criticized User:Sunfyre himself for what I saw as a similar pattern of targeting anti-regime and pro-Pahlavi contributors for creating and editing articles on anti-regime subjects, which may or may not influence his approach toward me and my contributions. He is known to hold strong anti-Pahlavi views, and I believe he has failed to keep them from influencing his conduct as an administrator. He has sought to discredit me and my years of encyclopedic contributions rather than address these concerns, including my exceptional situation as an Iranian user and human being. For editors working inside Iran, this was not an abstract dispute: I feared for my life and safety because regime-aligned administrators had access to our IP addresses. We were subjected to this situation, with no meaningful help. We were desperate young and teenage users who were actively trying to hide our identities to protect our lives. Something that may seem normal to many English Wikipedia users was, for us, a matter of life and death.
My position remains the same as I stated there: this article meets Wikipedia's Wikipedia:Notability (people), reliable-sourcing, and Wikipedia:Verifiability requirements. That is why I proceeded to create it in the first place, after realizing that it satisfied these Wikipedia rules and guidelines. And that is enough to keep it. Deleting an article that satisfies Wikipedia's rules breaches those rules, which is what happened on Persian Wikipedia. They have turned Wikipedia into a democracy, despite the fact that Wikipedia is not a democracy. Due to the regime's control over the internet, its influence on Persian Wikipedia, and the lack of enough active, independent Persian-speaking users, regimi users maneuver freely in doing so. Just read the arguments there. Articles with substantially weaker claims to notability have been kept by certain Persian Wikipedia administrators, while anti-regime and pro-Pahlavi subjects have faced disproportionate deletion, censorship, sabotage, and overt scrutiny. Certain guidelines (not rules) needed to be overlooked in my case because of my exceptional situation as an Iranian whose identity as a Wikipedia user must be protected because exposure is life-threatening. Certain Persian Wikipedia users attempted to push for my exposure and doxxing, apparently for this very reason.
I urge English Wikipedia participants not to let the decontextualized and false argument presented by User:Sunfyre and the other similar users involved in the initial speedy-deletion and subsequent deletion attempts determine the outcome. Persian Wikipedia's circumstances, including the Islamist regime's control over internet access and its documented efforts to influence editors through recruitment, coercion, or compromise, deserve serious consideration and investigation. For that reason, deletions on Persian Wikipedia should not automatically be taken at face value without examining this broader context, especially when articles concern anti-regime and pro-Pahlavi topics.
I hope these cases prompt an independent Wikimedia Foundation investigation into Persian Wikipedia administrators and accountability for those found to have abused their positions, including those who followed the pattern associated with User:Mardetanha. There is much more to discuss, but I will stop here for the sake of brevity. Thank you for your attention. Sandboxerr (talk) 12:08, 13 October 2026 (UTC)
"For the sake of brevity". That's a good one! Geschichte (talk) 07:04, 18 October 2026 (UTC)
It is also worth mentioning the context, that I had completely lost access to my main account and its email and created this account for that reason, having lost hope of recovering access. That is why I created this account in the first place, not for the reasons those who wish to misrepresent the situation suggest. Some time after creating this account, I asked a Wikimedia administrator named Matthew Hill for help recovering my original account, and he assisted me in doing so. I regained access to it only a short while ago and have not edited with it so far. Consequently, I did not violate the sockpuppetry policy, as this account was created for legitimate reasons, not to mislead the community. I had already publicly disclosed the situation on Persian Wikipedia, and I am now explaining it here as well. Furthermore, I never edited with both accounts simultaneously. If I had access to my original account, I would have created my article using that account on both Wikipedias and did not need to do it with this, as this topic (Iran politics) falls within my years of contributions, area of expertise, and preference for editing on Wikipedia, and I have previously created many similar articles with similar topic like this. As I explained, in light of WP:IGNORE, I had to temporarily overlook certain guidelines (and not binding rules) because of my exceptional circumstances at the time. My actions were motivated primarily by the loss of access to my main account, as well as other important concerns, and not by any intention to evade or circumvent Wikipedia's policies. Using a sockpuppet account for legitimate reasons and concerns is allowed and tolerated under Wikipedia's rules. Thank you. Sandboxerr (talk) 13:44, 13 October 2026 (UTC)
Comment: I first became aware of possible issues with disruption to this article while I was patrolling logs and recent changes. I saw that a temporary user had removed a speedy deletion tag (originally added by PlainMarkup) from this article, and I reverted the edit in order to restore it. I then reviewed the speedy deletion tagging, determined that the article content made a credible claim of significance and wasn't eligible for A7, and declined and removed the tag afterwards. Sandboxerr then started the discussion on my user talk page that they provided a permalink to in their response above (the entire discussion can be found here). The user talk page discussion and the response above both contain lengthy allegations and claims regarding other editors, involvement with "cyber agents for the Islamic regime in Iran" (quoted from this diff), and repeated attempts to disrupt or remove the article on this project and the Persian Wikipedia. These claims can easily become a distraction and a rabbit hole for participants here to jump into, and I urge everyone participating in this discussion to keep in mind and remember that these claims are completely irrelevant, remain focused on determining whether the article subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and base their responses off of this determination. ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 15:11, 14 October 2026 (UTC)
Rationale for keeping: As the administrator suggested, I will avoid going down any rabbit holes and discuss only the article itself. I present my entire final rationale below and leave the final decision to the judgment of the participating editors and administrators.
Consistency of coverage - WP:BIO: The subject has received consistent and continuous coverage, which has continued even after this AfD began. Deleting an article despite continuing coverage of a subject who meets the notability criteria is a redundancy since such articles often may be created again and it's unnecessary when any shortcomings can be addressed through editing. Wikipedia's deletion policies support considering improvement and other alternatives to deletion.
Self-published sources claims - WP:SELFPUB: Certain op-ed sources used in the article are not necessarily considered self-published, since the platforms do not belong to the author himself and are independent publications. Under English Wikipedia policy, an autobiographical op-ed published by an established news organization is not automatically considered self-published merely because the subject wrote it. Therefore, WP:Selfpublish is not automatically violated by using such material. While op-eds do not establish notability through independent coverage, they may supplement the article where appropriate. Wikipedia rules allow such supplementary use. The subject's notability is independently supported by direct coverages in multiple reliable, notable and independent sources. Any concerns about individual claims or citations can be addressed through editing and improvement, rather than using them alone as grounds for deletion.
Conclusion based on WP:ATD and WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP: I respectfully support keeping the article based on its independent, consistent coverage and the availability of further ordinary editorial improvements to satisfy Wikipedia rules and guidelines. Thank you. Sandboxerr (talk) 19:36, 14 October 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: As Oshwah mentioned, the future of this article will be decided based on the strength of its sourcing; nothing else. An independent source assessment would be helpful here. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen×☎ 18:13, 19 October 2026 (UTC)
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at: