Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohammad Gul (Guantanamo detainee)

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 redirect to Afghan detainees at Guantanamo Bay. -Scottywong | chat _ 16:46, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Gul (Guantanamo detainee)

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

On a living (now released) prisoner from Guantanamo Fails WP:BLP1E, WP:NOTINHERITED, WP:BIO. There are no secondary sources or independent coverage to claim notability of the subject. The citation used are WP:PRIMARY sources (WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 84#Reliability of US military summary reports) WP:BLPPRIMARY DBig Xray 18:01, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. 02:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 02:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. 02:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 02:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 02:22, 17 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not notable due to lack of "signficant coverage" in reliable sources per WP:GNG. Anotherclown (talk) 05:40, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Mentions in trial transcripts do not confer notability, and there is complete lack of significant and specific coverage by secondary published reliable sources. Manifestly fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Nsk92 (talk) 13:28, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that a consensus is emerging that we smerge most of these individual articles into a larger Afghan detainees at Guantanamo Bay or such title. Bearian (talk) 19:13, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- No, thanks, no merges or smerges, unless someone personally promises to actually undertake them within a short amount of time. Given that the creator of this article has created what looks like hundreds of similarly non-notable articles on Guantanamo-related topics, and most of these articles have been sitting in mainspace for years, anything other than a straight delete or redirect is not a realistic option here. Nsk92 (talk) 23:24, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect to Afghan detainees at Guantanamo Bay per WP:R#HARMFUL and WP:R#KEEP.--Joshuaism (talk) 20:20, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The nomination claims there are no secondary sources, while the article already cited secondary sources -- including a profile based on a US reporter specifically seeking him out. Geo Swan (talk) 00:21, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Afghan detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Multiple passing mentions of the subject in news articles, however none can be considered significant coverage, and thus fails WP:GNG. Multiple non-news reliable sources found of the subject, however given that the subject was an unlawful combatant detainee at Guantanamo Naval Base, I find those to be routine coverage for such an individual. Subject fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:CRIMINAL, & WP:SOLDIER. As the subject's detention is notable a redirect to the article about detainees can be left in the articlespace.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:06, 20 August 2012 (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.