Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nahum Shahaf

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 no consensus. Opinions are split about whether this is a WP:BLP1E case, which is a matter of editorial judgment. Sandstein 08:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nahum Shahaf

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

I believe Nahum Shahaf to only be notable for one event. That event, the Muhammad al-Durrah incident, is already a featured article, and discusses Shahaf and his (relatively minor) role in some detail. ← George^talk 09:22, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by George

Delete - I'm nominating this article because I believe the subject, Nahum Shahaf, is only notable for one event - the Muhammad al-Durrah incident. That article is already featured status, and explains Shahaf's role in adequate detail. Some additional thoughts:
1. Shahaf's article lists him being awarded an Israeli science ministry creativity prize in 1997, and being involved in conspiracy theories involving the assassination of Yitzak Rabin in 1995. I don't believe Shahaf is notable for either of these, as there is no mention of either in reliable sources published before the event he is notable for. They are only mentioned as side notes in articles detailing the Muhammad al-Durrah incident, published after that event occurred in 2000.
2. Only a single article links to this page - the Muhammad al-Durrah incident article.
3. Shahaf's role in the al-Durrah incident, while notable, was relatively minor. Other individuals who played larger roles in the incident - Muhammad al-Durrah, Jamal al-Durrah, and Talal Abu Rahma - redirect to the article on the incident, or don't even have articles. ← George^talk 09:39, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have searched for information regarding Shahaf on the Factiva news database and have found nothing before 2000 and nothing that does not relate to his role in the al-Durrah controversy. He does not seem to have any visibility in any other sphere of activity. Therefore, since this does look like a WP:ONEEVENT case, I agree that the article should be deleted or redirected to Muhammad al-Durrah incident. -- ChrisO (talk) 09:30, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: maybe the rest of the editors promoting that we include the conspiracy theory about Rabin -- even though we don't know what it is (rejected as a WP:BLP-vio) -- should take a step back from this straw poll. As a sign of good faith, I've decided to take a step back from !voting as well. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 11:00, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Easily and obviously exceeds WP threshholds for notability. Appeared on 60 Minutes, quoted in the Atlantic Monthly, mentioned freqeuntly in Israeli papers, a major proponent of a significant minority view. IronDuke 12:51, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per ID.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:57, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep; I'd like to see better sourcing outside of the al-Durrah incident, but seems to meet WP:BIO. THF (talk) 19:00, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep—Shahaf is indeed notable mostly for the al-Durrah incident (also for other things, but he's less famous for them), but even his involvement in the al-Durrah incident is notable and WP:1E does not apply. He won the 2008 Israel Media Watch award for media criticism (regarding the al-Durrah affair), which I believe gives him enough notability for a separate article, even if it's part of the al-Durrah affair. Apparently he was also responsible for uncovering voter fraud and other incidents. Moreover, as a scientist he was involved in Israel's weapons development programs and, according to the article, received a prize for this from the Science and Technology Ministry in 1997. He also regularly conducts lectures in numerous universities. That seems notable enough for me. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:27, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect the title to the relevant section of Muhammad al-Durrah incident. This is a borderline situation, but on balance I agree with George and ChrisO. Nahum Shahaf played a pivotal, but controversial and not entirely clear, role in an Israel Defense Forces investigation into the death of Muhammad al-Durrah. It concluded that Israel probably hadn't shot the boy, and Shahaf privately concluded that maybe no one had shot him. This makes Shahaf's background and reputation vital to the story of al-Durrah's shooting. If you can show that Shahaf is reputable, you bolster the view that there was something fishy about the shooting. If you can denigrate Shahaf, you imply that there was something fishy about the IDF investigation. The article is therefore a BLP violation waiting to happen. While I was researching the al-Durrah article, I couldn't find many secondary sources who went into detail about Shahaf, so there really isn't enough to support a well-researched and balanced biography; if you look at the current version, too much relies on primary sources or passing mentions in secondary ones. Therefore I think the best thing is to delete it and redirect his name to al-Durrah. SlimVirgin ^{TALK contribs} 23:11, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment his role is pretty clear imho. Best I'm aware, he was the head of the investigation under Yom Tov Samia. The one who used forensics experts and also the one who fired Duriel after he came out to the media with investigation material while the investigation was ongoing. I have no solid opinion on the Shahaf article, only that I'd hope the people who want to portray him as a crackpot because of the al-Durrah incident wouldn't be involved in any further !voting. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 18:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect per Slimvirgin. Factsontheground (talk) 02:39, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I prefer "delete" to having an article that acts as a soapbox for Shahaf, wherein the resume he has on his blog takes precedence over reliable sources. I'm ok if there is "Keep" decision, in that case RS-supported info on Shahaf's activities outside the al-Durrah case must be included without the selective sampling that some editors have thusfar been supporting. Also it might be a good idea at this point to ask editors to declare if they have any conflict of interest issues re: Shahaf, if they know him personally for example. Respectfully, RomaC (talk) 04:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Expecting to possibly draw some fire for this comment from people who haven't reviewed our past discussions over Shahaf -- but -- I wonder how you'd feel about a similar sample of "RS-s" in regards to Arafat's alleged sexual orientation. Have you given a look to WP:BLP? As in the case of Arafat, the Shahaf smears you're interested in presenting are not fitting without serious mainstream examination. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 13:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If Arafat's website had pics of the Chippendales that could be interesting. Shahaf's website has plenty of info on the Rabin assassination, you are the only one who said Shahaf's conspiracy theories made him look like "a crackpot" -- he seems rather proud of them, and has organized talks on them, so this "smear" you allege is only so in your own opinion. But it's not your or my job to judge how Shahaf looks, to comb his hair and zip his fly or censure reliably-sourced information we don't personally like. We write about him, using RS, simple. RomaC (talk) 02:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Reliable sources on Arafat (high ranked officials) are of higher value than the ones criticizing Shahaf (i.e. the ones being sued for misrepresenting him). I'm not following your recent suggestion that we use Shahaf's own site for the Rabin issue when you earlier flatly rejected it without even reviewing linked content within. Well, unless I assume bad faith. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 02:42, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A basic reading of the article reveals that he is notable outside of the Al-Dura incident.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 20:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could you explain how, exactly? Robofish (talk) 00:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is his work on the Rabin assassination notable, do you think? RomaC (talk) 02:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Muhammad al-Durrah incident or Delete. This is a fairly clear case of WP:BLP1E: the article doesn't contain any significant assertion of notability unrelated to that incident and his investigation into it. Robofish (talk) 00:49, 20 March 2010 (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.