- 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 Athletics at the 1988 Summer Olympics – Men's 5000 metres. Invoking N:EXIST without some evidence that sourcing has been (potentially) identified is not a path to a Keep and those !votes have been disregarded.. Star Mississippi 00:51, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Farouk Ahmed Sayed (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Declined prod. The only 2 sources added after prodding are 2 databases. We need SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. As shown in other AfDs, keep votes just saying WP:NEXIST with zero evidence of sources don't work in saving articles. LibStar (talk) 08:40, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Yemen. LibStar (talk) 08:40, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete: The sources fail to demonstrate any form of notability and thus should be deleted. JustARandomEditor123 (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. No accomplishments whatsoever and no significant coverage. This would need several strong pieces of independent, significant coverage - and by the way, not the passing mentions that may soon be presented in this discussion - to be eligible for inclusion. Geschichte (talk) 16:11, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Geschichte For the record, I searched and was not even able to find a passing mention. --Habst (talk) 18:42, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
- Keep based on WP:NEXIST, with a possibility for procedural keep. Context for procedural keep: Over 80 articles all in the same narrow topic (Olympic-level track and field competitors from non-English-speaking countries) have been brought to AfD or PRODed this month, as compared to a typical one or two per week otherwise. It takes significant effort to do a complete source search for each of these, all of which aren't in English and most of which are from the pre-Internet era from countries that have not digitized their national newspaper archives yet. If a sweeping argument should be made, then make that as a mass nomination, but otherwise these need to be more spread out. Having this many individual AfDs open at once about these historical figures notoriously difficult to research sets up an insurmountable task.
- NEXIST rationale: South Yemeni newspapers from the 1980s haven't been found yet, we would expect coverage because Sayed was the only long-distance runner in history to represent South Yemen at the Olympics – making his notability at least in part of a political nature and not just sporting achievements.
- The simple fact is that Farouk Ahmed Sayed is no less notable than (for example) Chae Hong-nak or Adalberto García. The only difference is the online availability of newspaper coverage from the region at the time. Just because sources aren't on the Internet doesn't mean the article should be deleted, per WP:NEXIST. --Habst (talk) 18:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
- The NEXIST argument didn't work in these AfDs Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Msiska and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moustafa Matola. Even if sources are WP:OFFLINE you must still specify them. LibStar (talk) 03:01, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- @LibStar, each case needs to be evaluated on its own merits. A specific page number, book, or even work doesn't need to be specific to invoke NEXIST. What do you think about the specifics of this case? --Habst (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- Please provide sources, ironically you say "each case needs to be evaluated on its own merits" yet you wanted AfDs to be bundled into a mass nomination. LibStar (talk) 23:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
- I've searched for sources and can't find any, so you're asking me for something I fully admit I don't have. That doesn't make the NEXIST rationale any less valid. --Habst (talk) 16:11, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
- As an admin said "a nomination cannot be procedurally closed simply because the nominator didn't check for sources in a language with which they are unfamiliar. Contrarily, WP:NEXIST clearly tells us, However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface." LibStar (talk) 22:50, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
- Which admin said that? It's difficult to respond to quotes when the context isn't known. I don't even necessarily disagree with the quote – the keyword being "seldom", and in some cases NEXIST can be persuasive. --Habst (talk) 15:56, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- As an admin said "a nomination cannot be procedurally closed simply because the nominator didn't check for sources in a language with which they are unfamiliar. Contrarily, WP:NEXIST clearly tells us, However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface." LibStar (talk) 22:50, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
- I've searched for sources and can't find any, so you're asking me for something I fully admit I don't have. That doesn't make the NEXIST rationale any less valid. --Habst (talk) 16:11, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
- Please provide sources, ironically you say "each case needs to be evaluated on its own merits" yet you wanted AfDs to be bundled into a mass nomination. LibStar (talk) 23:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
- @LibStar, each case needs to be evaluated on its own merits. A specific page number, book, or even work doesn't need to be specific to invoke NEXIST. What do you think about the specifics of this case? --Habst (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- The NEXIST argument didn't work in these AfDs Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Msiska and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moustafa Matola. Even if sources are WP:OFFLINE you must still specify them. LibStar (talk) 03:01, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Global consensus requires a SIGCOV-containing IRS source to be cited in sportsperson articles. No such source has been identified. NEXIST does not exempt subjects from the requirement that
there must be verifiable, objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources to support a claim of notability.
JoelleJay (talk) 04:13, 1 March 2025 (UTC)- Totally agreed. The recycling of this NEXIST argument with no sources provided doesn't work. LibStar (talk) 08:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- Keep: WP:NEXIST 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 08:30, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- Please provide sources. LibStar (talk) 08:33, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- Redirect to Athletics at the 1988 Summer Olympics – Men's 5000 metres as a valid ATD for an Olympic participant. --Enos733 (talk) 23:36, 4 March 2025 (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.
You must be logged in to post a comment.