Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talal El Merhebi

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. Big Dom 00:20, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talal El Merhebi

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

Quite obviously an autobiography by Tmerhebi (talk · contribs). Not sure about notability. bender235 (talk) 14:24, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As a former member of parliament in Lebanon, and a former government minister with several portfolios, he clearly passes WP:POLITICIAN. Autobiographies are strongly discouraged but are not forbidden. Improve through normal editing rather than deleting. Cullen328 (talk) 16:04, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a source for his parliamentary membership? None of the refs in the article supports that claim. --bender235 (talk) 12:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There are two issues here. The first is the notability of the subject, which would be satisfied by a reference confirming the term in office. No problem there. The second, though, is the concern that the article is Autobiography. It's possible, and there is precedent (as I recall), that an article on an otherwise notable subject might be deleted if it is flawed beyond repair. Is the authorship sufficient to taint the article? I don't know. But deleting the article in order to make a fresh, neutral version might well be justified. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 13:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. These sources linked in the article confirm that the subject was a member of parliament. As said by Cullen328 any neutrality issues associated with this being an autobiography can be addressed by editing, and deleting the article and its history would hamper any efforts to improve it. Nowhere in WP:AUTO or in deletion policy does it say that being an autobiography is a reason in itself to delete an article, so I would advise bender235 to stop nominating articles for deletion with that rationale. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- If an article were so riddled with Non-neutral COI shenanigans and Autobiographical self-promotion that removing problem content would leave nothing remaining, then deletion should absolutely be the option. But if its that bad, chances are it would qualify for speedy deletion as spam, which is not the case here. Quite the opposite, per below, I think your source is sufficient to keep. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 17:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment WP:AUTO was never my rational for deletion. It was just some additional information. --bender235 (talk) 22:52, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per my comment above. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 17:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:43, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep elected member of Parliament and apparently a Minister makes him clearly pass the notability criteria. MLA (talk) 12:58, 6 March 2011 (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.