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 delete. Davewild (talk) 17:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Avera Mengistu[edit]

Avera Mengistu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This article is nothing more but WP:FRINGE theory by Richard Silverstein which has been around since October 2014. No source but Silverstein's Mint article names Mengistu by name and Silverstein himself fails WP:RS.

Silverstein himself already replied on the talk page and speak of 'freedom of press' which show he doesn't understand WP:NOTNEWSPAPER.

It is seems Silverstein himself published the article since the Mint reference was in sandbox (w/o a link) even before the article came out on June 2nd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kigelim (talk • contribs) 10:01, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update - This seems to be part of campaign to promote Silverstein theory. A similar page was created in Arabic Wiki by RadioMan (link) which I found out about on a Israeli forum by a user named 'Dicky' (coincidence?). The following post refers to this very page about deletion of the English page. Looking at the forum user history, he/she has been spreading the rumor for months now [1] . There is no doubt this is an attempt to harness Wikipedia for a cause. Kigelim (talk) 18:10, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete - all conjecture (the billboard analysis is ridiculous); complete fringe theory, no sources whatsoever, there's no evidence of this as fact. It's not impossible, but it's unacceptable for a Wikipedia article, especially as a BLP! —Мандичка^YO 😜 10:50, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong and speedy delete Clearly FRINGE with a touch of WP:BOLLOCKS ukexpat (talk) 17:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, obvious per WP:BLP1E. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 04:12, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Do you remember Prisoner X/Ben Zygier? In the beginning it was also nominated for deletion, but turned to be a HUGE story. Now Avera Mengistu is another "Prisoner X". רדיומן (talk) 04:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - "turned to be a HUGE story"... Please read WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL. The fact something out of it became a story doesn't mean it feets WP policies. This is how the article looked when nominated for deletion. Do you see the name of Zinger anywhere? I see an Iranian general. This is an example of how Silverstein sometimes gets it right and sometimes wrong and thus fail WP:RS. If you want to challenge it, please use WP:RSN. Kigelim (talk) 09:58, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The claim that I wrote this Wikipedia article is false and a lie. Anyone who reads the history can see who wrote it & that it wasn't me.

The argument offered for deleting the article is that my reporting is unreliable. But there has been no evidence offered that Mint Press News, which vetted my story before publication, is not a credible source. Further, the article itself clearly states that I interviewed members of the imprisoned man's family & that they confirmed the story. So in reality, this complaining individual is demanding that I be held to even higher standards than other journalists whose work is featured on Wikipedia. Which isn't fair.

Further, there are political motivations behind this campaign. The original person who complained comments at my blog. He was moderated and has both a personal & political vendetta rooted in his right wing views concerning Israeli-Arab politics. Mixing this up with false accusations of sockpuppetry is an attempt to further muddy the waters.

The plain fact is that this article is important. It is researched. It is sourced. It is accurate. I not only know the name of the imprisoned man, I know his father and brother's name. I know the street they live on in Ashkelon & have their phone numbers and have spoken to them all. This is what journalism is.

You will find that when Hamas and Israel agree to a prisoner exchange that this man is among those released. He is in the same role as Gilad Shalit was. If Gilad Shalit's identity had not been known, but a journalist published his name after confirming his identity with his family, Wikipedia would want an article based on such knowledge. That's why this article deserves to remain on Wikipedia.

If the article is removed, when Avera Mengistu is released and his name is confirmed outside of my Mint Press article, then anyone who had a hand in removing it will be seen as having done a disservice to Wikipedia. Richard Silverstein (talk) 07:56, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Richard, please read WP:NPA before writing about other editors.

Nobody here says the information is false but Wikipedia has certain standards of WP:Verifiability which experienced editors seem to think the Mint article fails (WP:SOURCE). Beyond this, the piece is written as political/social op-ed, (WP:NEWSORG) not news. The deep WP:BIASED in the Mint article ("Abandons", "But should that come as any surprise?") does not add to the writer credibity either.

+ Wikipedia would want an article based on such knowledge - no it doesn't. Read WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL.

+ then anyone who had a hand in removing it will be seen as having done a disservice to Wikipedia - nobody here looks for scoops. Read WP:NOTNEWS.

I would also recommand Encyclopedia. Kigelim (talk) 10:30, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete lacks sources. At this point, this is sourced to a single Jordanian newspaper and a single unreliable blogger. Our quesiton is not whether it is true or false, it is whether sources that would pass WP:GNG exist. They do not.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:42, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's because this paragraph with 2 more sources was unjustly deleted: רדיומן (talk) 14:55, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"In January 2015, pan-Arabist satellite television channel Al Mayadeen reported^[1] that Hamas holds an Israeli Jewish prisoner of Ethiopian origin who was swept out to sea, and ended up on Gaza shore. The report did not name the man, and did not say how long he has been in captivity. In April 2015, the military affairs reporter of Kol Yisrael's Arabic-language radio station told a Palestinian radio station that Qassam Brigades may be holding an Israeli civilian. He said he can't elaborate on this, due to Israeli Military Censor's rules.^[2] "

Neither of those sources mentioned Mengistu at all -- they do nothing to support a case for notability. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Revising my opinion. I now strongly think Speedy deletion is the best solution to protect Wikipedia's reputation from this rather blatant attempt to use WP to put forward what I can only understand as partisan propaganda. If the editors aggressively pushing this article have sources, they should submit them to a journalist.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:13, 9 June 2015 (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.