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 keep. MelanieN (talk) 01:30, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

David Rokni (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)

No sources to establish notability. The BLPPROD tag was removed. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 17:22, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. st170e^talk 18:29, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. st170e^talk 18:29, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:CSD#G5 -- banned user (see WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Itailevi00). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:06, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The subject of the article is an iconic figure in Israeli culture. I personally added sourcing and I am sure there is more if someone takes the trouble to look. The fact that someone you don't like created the article is not a reason to delete.--Geewhiz (talk) 06:05, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Gilabrand: The WP:CSD#G5 criterion has nothing to do with the fact that "I don't like" the user. The user has been banned from Wikipedia for repeated offenses of policies, and Wikipedia policy is to automatically delete all article creations by banned users, whether or not the subject meets notability criteria. If this article is deleted on that basis, you are free to re-create it. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:13, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I do not think deleting it and telling me to spend my time recreating it, after I already spent time doing research, is the way to go...That sounds like a bizarre and counterproductive policy to me, certainly not one that will encourage anyone to contribute constructively to Wikipedia.--Geewhiz (talk) 11:37, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gilabrand: Actually, G5 only applies to articles whose only substantial contributor is the blocked user. Since you have expanded the article, G5 no longer applies. (Tag has been removed.) WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:21, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The subject is definitely notable, since colonel Rokni is really a legendary person in Israeli Culture :). There are enough independent sources, confirming his notability. Article in it's current form is definitely stub and need to be expanded, but it's not the reason to delete it. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 13:49, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Meets notabilty guidelines, but is a stub and needs expansion KGirlTrucker87 ^{talk what I'm been doing} 11:47, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Person is well known in Israel. Gilabrand has done a good job bringing it up to an acceptable stub. It needs expansion, of course. As an aside, the "banned sockpuppet" is not a disruptive editor in the traditional sense; he is just a good faith editor who can't remember his password and lacks competence. He is clearly trying to help the encyclopedia but his editing is disruptive as-is. If only we could get in contact with him (in Hebrew, if necessary) and reason with him? He could be rehabilitated into a useful editor if only he would talk to us! AnotherNewAccount (talk) 16:55, 29 May 2016 (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.