Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahad Israfil

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 of the debate was keep. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ahad Israfil

non-notable person, plenty of people survive serious gunshot wounds, and while it's a great story, I don't think it is very encyclopedic or well known. Peyna 01:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep. Not every gunshot victim makes Ripley's Believe It or Not: [1] -Medtopic 04:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Very weak keep, per Medtopic. --Coredesat 07:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep: Google returns over 1000 hits. On the first page of relevant hits (the first 10), all are unique content, none are Wiki mirrors, and content appears in four different languages. This person is well-known. - Che Nuevara: ^{Join the Revolution} 12:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep: Not sure if I should comment here really since I'm the one who put the article on in the first place, but here's my rationale: Phineas Gage is on there and this case is just as notable. Yes, many people survive serious gunshot wounds... but very very few survive what amounts to a traumatic hemispherectomy and make such an (almost) complete recovery. And he is well known... so well known in fact that I've said "Have you heard about Ahad can't-remember-his-other-name" to people and they know who I mean straight away, and I'm hardly local to Dayton, Ohio, coming from South West England. OK, I admit it, I try to add outlandish articles to Wikipedia and would be disappointed if I didn't get an AFD straight away, but I wouldn't do ones that actually deserved to be deleted. Milvinder 13:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment (voted above): Phineas Gage is definitely more well-known than this person. I would say that Gage verges on a household name in many places. Nonetheless, this case is important, verifiable, and notable. - Che Nuevara: ^{Join the Revolution} 13:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

On edit: It's perfectly legitimate for the article's creator to comment on AfD, so long as you identify yourself as the creator. - 13:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep -- agree with Medtopic above -- MrDolomite 14:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Doesn't seem notable to me, and getting into Ripley's just isn't a sufficient assertion of notability to me. I doubt we have an article about the guy who ate the most hard-boiled eggs. The case of Phineas Gage had great importance to neuroscience; if this person's case has similar influence, then that influence should be covered in the article and I'll change my vote. TomTheHand 14:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I've seen this chap on numerous shows on TV in the past, very extraordinary incident.--Andeh 15:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. For a start it has media coverage, which gives notability. Well done Milvinder for innovative articling. Tyrenius 18:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I'm assuming good will and accuracy, that he really lost half of his brain. If so, I think this is a keep, but a stronger reference would help. snug 18:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• keep - no problems keeping this, verifiable. --Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 20:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per verifiability. –ArmadniGeneral (talk • contribs) 20:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I've actually heard of this, it was covered on a few different media outlets, at the very least across the U.S. The guy lost half his brain! Grandmasterka 05:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• keep please agree with the above Yuckfoo 18:40, 28 June 2006 (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.