Talk:Amal Clooney

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closing and collapsing deletion discussions, take it to the AfD page please. Safiel (talk) 22:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

---

Extended content

Contested deletion This page should not be speedily deleted because there does not appear to be a suitable reason for deletion. Contested deletion Overturn. This page should not be speedily deleted because Amal Alamuddin meets the standards for being included, based on her resume and body of accomplishments, and many public reports about her, which need not be repeated here, without regard for her engagement to George Clooney. The article could be expanded, however, because the more one researches her the more notable she appears. Bracton (talk) 15:28, 29 April 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedily deleted because... this is outright censorship and it should have no place at wikipedia; as a donor to your site I am offended by this. I have no doubt that there are very objectionable descriptions in this site and there is no censorship of those, why should there be one of this article. This clearly makes me pause as to my financial commitment to wikipedia. --75.93.91.234 (talk) 17:22, 3 May 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedily deleted because i find all of the material taken from valid references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.190.73 (talk) 19:01, 3 May 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedily deleted because... How on earth am I supposed to read the facts about George Clooney's extremely intelligent fiancé when you delete her page ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.72.186.44 (talk) 22:31, 3 May 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedily deleted because there are 1000s of pages on persons bio - actor, celeb, politicians then why not for Amal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.38.225 (talk) 01:38, 4 May 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedily deleted because... I do not know your criteria for speedy deletion; but assuming accuracy in the article, she seems more accomplished than George Clooney, who she is said to be marrying and whose fame may have gotten her here. Why delete the more accomplished partner in a public relationship. I'm sure you still have his page displayed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.214.195.4 (talk) 05:04, 4 May 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Michael B. Miller, PhD 21:51, 4 May 2014 (UTC) You guys think every episode of The Simpsons should have it's own wiki page, but an international UN lawyer should have her page deleted? Is that because she is female? Is it because she is Middle Eastern? Is it because she is engaged to George Clooney? Please explain. Thanks. By the way, I am only here right now because I had heard that Clooney was engaged to a very interesting and well-educated (Oxford?) woman and I wanted to read about her. The potential of that couple to have an important impact in international politics is huge. I can't believe you let someone delete her entry!! Mike Miller Michael B. Miller, Ph.D. Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research Department of Psychology University of Minnesota http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=EV_phq4AAAAJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbmiller (talk • contribs) 21:51, 4 May 2014 (UTC) Contested deletion This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --66.192.70.42 (talk) 17:23, 5 May 2014 (UTC) This person is newsworthy in her own right. Even prior to the news explosion of the last few days, there was a lot written about her in conventional news sources and she is famous in a field that is of great public interest. Delete: Wikipedia is not a newspaper This page should be deleted. While Ms Alamuddin has generated some news, she is not notable for an entry in an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not just a respository of facts culed from a newspaper. I specifically address this page and this problem in this article: http://newslines.org/blog/wikipedia-is-not-a-newspaper/ -- Sparkzilla talk! 01:21, 8 May 2014 (UTC) Hi Sparkzilla, please can you explain your argument here, rather than on an external blog? Thanks. 192.76.7.196 (talk) 17:05, 12 May 2014 (UTC) + Hi everyone else I don't think it's smart to follow the link to newslines.org because Sparkzilla owns the site (per whois), so if people follow the link he gets to see their IP addresses and maybe set cookies, leave beacons and so on. It's not like it is anything official this is just Mark blogging his opinion! I'm not saying he's deliberately trying to promote his site or not, but shouldn't he put his opinion here if he wants people to read it? 192.76.7.205 (talk) 21:04, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Archived from original?

Was curious as to why many of the citations on this entry are archived from the original -- even though the links are active / good, non-dead links? Is this a new citation style that is being used? Thanks in advance for any info on this. Best, Erika BrillLyle (talk) 23:52, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

It is not a requirement AFAIK, but it's always best to include the archived version, so that it doesn't matter what happens to the original - some of these news sites will have faster turnover / access restrictions than others. Archiving just means the editor has 'future-proofed' the cite. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:14, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Can you revert

There are many sources describing her as Shiite or Muslim.

• Alamuddin, a Druze - The Daily Star (Lebanon)
• Is George Clooney’s fiancée Muslim? Yes, the way Mormons are Christian
• But Druze are classified from a secular/historical perspective as a branch of Islam because they are derived from a branch of Shi'ite Islam. - Adherents.com
• Lebanese-British international law attorney Amal Alamuddin — who like Jumblatt happens to be a Druze - Haaretz

Somebody please revert editor who removed my category.80.43.208.11 (talk) 09:23, 28 September 2014 (UTC)