Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark A. Gabriel (3rd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 04:05, 19 March 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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. The article was improved significantly during this discussion, and that caused opinion to change from several participants mid-way through towards retention. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:22, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mark A. Gabriel

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Mark A. Gabriel (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)

A convert from Islam to Christianity who claims to have been tortured. All but one reference is his own published account and the remaining ref is an advertisement for his book. He is probably a most worthy individual , but he fails to make WP:GNG by a mile.  Velella  Velella Talk   21:49, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 07:05, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 07:05, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Jupitus Smart 07:05, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - to forestall the inevitable re-analysis of past AFDs. Yes, I have looked at them. Yes I have no doubt "his" books are in Libraries. Yes I have no doubt that standard listings include his name because it is is written on the spine of some books. But..... that doesn't mean he exists or has had the life experiences claimed or, in fact, anything notable. I have read and re-read this and I am always left with the strong suggestion that this person is a convenient name to attribute to this type of book, possibly produced by more than one ghost writer. If the story were true, there would be reputable newspaper coverage - it would be like gold-dust - but there doesn't appear to be anything.  Velella  Velella Talk   12:43, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So what have you found in your WP:BEFORE searches? Jclemens (talk) 20:14, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Jclemens and E.M.Gregory I would re-direct you to my comments above, to my editing record of over 11 years here, and perhaps also to WP:AGF  Velella  Velella Talk   16:41, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My inquiry wasn't meant to take anything away from your investigation into the previous AfDs, but to query what other independent searching you had done. You mention a lack of reputable newspaper coverage, but don't mention how you came to that conclusion. Jclemens (talk) 17:42, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete This article is egregiously bad and is a WP:BLP. I think some fictional content he wrote is being falsely presented as his own personal biography. Power~enwiki (talk) 07:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Middle Eastern Forum seems to think he's real. So does the U.S. Defense Technical Information Center (open the full text PDF, search the references). His books certainly have been published and appear to be reasonably popular and widely held, as we can see from the past AfDs. There are other references, so I'm not even sure why this was nominated. Jclemens (talk) 07:55, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I've been worried about this article for some time but haven't researched it much. The book uses as the main source appears to be self-published. Amazon.com says it was published by the " International Evangelical Resource Centr" (sic) while another website with a copy of the book says "International Academic Centre for Muslim Evangelism", neither of which seems to exist outside the book. His supposed home page[1] and other pages are all full of advertising between mentions of him, even the contact page and the invite me pages have no way of contacting him or inviting him. I've removed the addition of a 2016 PhD by someone with a similar name as there's no link between the two other than the name and an interest in Islam and also because a number of pre-2016 sources call him Dr. - this is a BLP after all. As for Middle Eastern Forum, that's a book review - we know the book exists, that's not in question. It doesn't confirm the existence of the author, odd as that might sound. Ditto the other source, which only mentions his book among a lot of others, which doesn't make him notable. The first AfD, in 2005, was basically "he's written lots of books" with a bit of "but we can't verify the facts about him". The second AfD only had 2 votes, neither giving a policy based argument for notability and the 2nd keep !vote cited 4 source, of which 3 were self-published and one an M.A. dissertation(link for this is [2]]. I think as a BLP it fails both BLP and VERIFY. Find some news sources showing he's real and you might convince me, but I've seen nothing that I think shows the article meets our notability requirements. Doug Weller talk 11:45, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • changing to Keep - whether there is a real person with this name or not, I agree that the works with his name are notable. I agree with the latest comment that " Pseudo-Gabriels's influence in evangelical circles around the world is pretty clear from the sources. The current article is a farce, but a good WP article (apparently it got worse with time) highlighting the dubiousness of Gabriel's claims would be genuinely encyclopedic.". Doug Weller talk 09:31, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that the fact that an author's book gets reviewed in does contribute to notability of the author. And that assertions that he a fraud could make him notable all by itself. Doug Weller, Have you had any luck finding additional sources, I mean other responsible people, media, or organizations alleging that he invented the bio It certainly sounds like a it could be a dramatically inflated bio)?E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:00, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Odd situation. There are suspicions that this author may have invented a dramatic back-story/biography for himself; he claims to have taken a new name upon conversion to Christianity, which makes it pretty hard to verify his claim to have once taught at Al-Azhar University. And his books were vanity-published, although at least one was then translated into Norwegian, and that was paid for not by Gabriel but by a Christian Missionary outfit. Moreover, his books not only sold, they, and he, appear to have had a significant following, among Westerners concerned about Islamist terrorism and among those who enjoy hearing about a Muslim who has converted to Christianity. He is certainly on the Christian Evangelical speaking circuit. I have begun sourcing the article. Beware! presentism; he seems to have been getting more press in the years shortly after 9/11.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:17, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:HEYMANN. I was prompted to take a closer look after clicking on that first AFD - and the 2nd. If nothing else, they were a strong indication that sources must have been out there a decade ago. I have now sourced some of the books to reviews in reliable places, including a review by Walter Russell Mead in Foreign Affairs. Added 2 WP:RSes addressing Gabriel's impact. Also added newspaper interviews. More can certainly be done. However, I think all stated objections in delete votes above have been addressed by the current state of article and sourcing. I do worry about the assertion/rumor that Gabriel is a fraud (as opposed to a guy who changed his name to hide his identity after converting from Islam to Christianity. this assertion encounters BLP issues, especially since all we have is an assertion - more or less a report of a rumor. Unless someone can locate additional WP:RS. I have looked and can't find a second source for this the assertion of fraud that looks at all reliable (just fake news and rumor). Note that I am not asserting that Gabriel is either a good scholar or a reliable one; only that he is (or was) notable. And WP:NOTTEMPORARY.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, but modify per here "The books exist, but I can't verify the claimed biographical facts. So I propose that the article should be rewritten to stress that these are unverified claims". As stated in that first AfD, the books exist, they make certain claims about the author, some claims have been disproved, many questioned, few - if any - verified. Further doubts here, we should treat this name as an 'anon', and unverifiable nom-de-plume, though I don't know what protocol is for that. There are sufficient reasons to be very sceptical about this person being who they say they are, but no way of knowing who they truly are. Pincrete (talk) 13:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A person who self identifies as Mustafa and who asserts in "his" book that (he was an )

Imam in the mosque of Anas Ebn Malek in the city of Giza.

 is really hiding his history ? I think not.  Velella  Velella Talk   17:52, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Having a great number of sources is not the same as demonstrating notability. I don't have access to the first two refs but the remainder simply regurgitate the life story told by "Mark A Gabriel" . Not a single reference provides any evidence that he exists of ever has existed. We know that a person claiming that name turns up at speaking engagements in the US but as far as the refs go he could be Walter Mitty , or a close cousin. The biography section inextricably links the name with the history that he recounts, yet there is not a shred of evidence to link the two. If his claim was that he had written a piece of fiction about what it might be like to change religions in the Middle East and had become a significant author selling such books, then he might well be notable, but he claims it as truth and no references back up that claim.  Velella  Velella Talk   22:54, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Christoph Luxenberg is unambiguously presented as an anon nom-de-plume. We normally allow self-sourced info for authors of a trivial nature, this is not trivial. This is a person claiming to be an expert on Islam, claiming to be a convert from Islam and claiming to be unable to provide anything verifiable because of fear of retribution. If any one of those claims is substantially exaggerated, the whole edifice collapses. The only biog info is provided by him or those with a clear interest in promoting his story. An alternative strategy might be to present the writings as article subject, written by an anon nom-de-plume. ..... Walter Mitty? Surely not? Pincrete (talk) 12:06, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pincrete, you fail to understand how Wikipedia works. We have hundreds of Category:Pseudonymous writers. Many of these were not identified until long after their deaths. Others have never been identified. If the work of a writer working under a nom de plum for whatever reason is notable, we can have an article on the writer or on the work. Ibn Warraq is a very close parallel. In this case, the article does not rely on citing Gabriel to his own work, it cites sources like a book review in Foreign Affairs written by Walter Russell Mead and is carefully worded, e.g., "In an long interview in Tulsa World, Gabriel claims to have fled..."E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:03, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note subhead Use of pseudonym in Christoph Luxenberg is sourced to Die Zeit, the New York Times and other WP:RS. Certainly we can add such a section, but ONLY If someone can source it. What we cannot do is to violate WP:BLP by editing an article according to the personal opinions of editors or the the report that there is a rumor about Gabriel's "true" identity, which is all that we have in the now. Please, please, PLEASE somebody find some WP:RS. Because we can't edit an article according rumors and to the personal opinions of editors.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:27, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that Christoph Luxenberg has been an article since 2005 and that a tentative identification of the author was only added to the article years later. another example is Ibn Warraq. Pincrete, Velella, I get that you WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT, just, that's not a reason to delete or make sweeping unsourced assertions of fraud on a page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:27, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My likes are irrelevant and have never been mentioned here. Please don't resort to ad hominem arguments by suggesting that this is somehow a personal issue. This is a very simple matter - there are no sources which demonstrate notability of the person that this article is supposed to be about. Period. I have no opinion on its likeability and Wikipedia similarly does not make such judgements.  Velella  Velella Talk   22:07, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:Velella DO NOT alter comments on talk pages after the discussion has moved on. proper protocol is to add or strike comments you wish to change - MARKING all additions and deletions.(I apologize, I mistook this edit, misplaced in the timeline, for a reworking of a comment. My error). That said, WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT, which is applied to nominations of articles for deletion and comments that, like yours at this discussion, express strong opinions without, for example, giving evidence of having followed WP:BEFORE. I know nothing of your "editing record" or personal "likes". But when you assert that "there are no sources which demonstrate notability of the person that this article is supposed to be about" it reveals that you not only started this nomination without searching for sources, you continue to make express strong views and even to make assertions about sourcing that fail to encounter the actual sourcing that is now in the article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:20, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The RS you call for need to support that the person exists, not prove that they don't and they need to be independent of the subject. There are few pseudonymous writers writing 'memoirs', nor writing books claiming expertise about a subject, having only self-sourced claims that they actually know anything about that subject. Pincrete (talk) 20:01, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Or perhaps you were referencing Leo Africanus. There is a long tradition of writers on Islam whose biographies are entirely self-sources and who claim to have been born within Dar al Islam, to have converter, and to have migrated into a Western country. Gabriel is part of a long tradition. Note however, that this BLP is now solidly sourced and that it describes Gabriel's past as based on his own account.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:55, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Two of those names are acknowledged nom-de-plumes, the third is a writer of fiction. Whether the BLP is adequately sourced and whether it sufficiently acknowledges Gabriel's account as being self-sourced, is for others to decide. A viable alternative is to base the article on the books, given the lack of info about the author. Pincrete (talk) 21:23, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, because we have a usual way of handling this sort of thing: (And Note that Christoph Luxenberg and Elena Ferrante pages existed for many years before sourced guesses about their identity was found. Here's [3] what the Luxenberg page looked like before sourced speculation about his identity was added.) As I have said before, we can certainly add something similar to the section Christoph Luxenberg#Use of pseudonym, Elena Ferrante#anonymity, but ONLY if WP:RS can be found. I have searched and not found any, but hope that someone coming here will know of such sources.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:41, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- I was not able to find sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail, or meaningful reviews of his works. The sources listed are interviews or trivial mentions, such as The Foreign Affairs source. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:16, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Of note is that the article has been extensively copy edited after the nomination for deletion occurred.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:09, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment He's discussed in some depth, albeit negatively, in this German review of a Susanne Hirzel interview, where his influence on evangelical circles is mentioned. An apparently outdated version of the "quite friendly" English WP article is cited too ("Mustafa/Gabriel’s life story is retold with number of discrepancies (for example, that he awarded a doctorate by Al Azhar) and various additions, including accounts of miraculous events"). The author of the review is Rainer Oechslen, a well-known theologian and the commissioner of the Bavarian Lutheran-Evangelical Church for interfaith dialogue. This may confirm the notability of Gabriel's work, regardless whether his bio is accurate. Moreover the UCT graduation report listed among the article sources contains the following.

Mark Abraham Gabriel Thesis title: "Reforming Hudud ordinances to reconcile Islamic criminallaw with international human rights law". Mark Gabriel is a graduate of Al-Azhar University in Cairo and former Lecturer of Islamic Studies. He holds a master‘s degree in Religion from SES in North Carolina and a second master’s degree, as well as a PhD in World Religion from FCU in Florida. He has been advisor on counter terrorism and Middle Eastern affairs to the FBI and has taught coursesin different universities in the United States of America and across the world.

I doubt that we're talking about a pseudonym here. WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT looms large. Like it or not, this is detailed information from a routinely reliable source. 84.73.134.206 (talk) 05:09, 18 July 2017 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mark_A._Gabriel_(3rd_nomination)&oldid=1077960469"