Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tareq Salahi

Tareq Salahi

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

Completely non-notable man. Only warrants an entry in the Gate-crashing article. Doesn't warrant his own article. Note – the Michaele Salahi article is also up for deletion as it is equally non-notable.Tovojolo (talk) 13:59, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP per Scooteristi, below. Sorry, I'm a noob at this. This couple is most certainly notable as well as notorious, and their story is just beginning to be told. Wikipedia should continue to chronicle their rise... and certain fall. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moucon (talk • contribs) 18:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete in accordance with WP:BLP1E. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 18:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BLP1E. Briefly notorious is not the same as notable. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michaele Salahi. --Dhartung | Talk 18:38, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per WP:BLP1E. Joe Chill (talk) 19:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The answer is to not rush to hasty judgment because this case is likely to play out in the media for a while increasing the fame and notability of this douchebag and his wife. Again, being a douchebags isn't a reason to delete a page, if it were there are a few thousand people whose pages I'd love to delete. I don't like the Salahis, as people I find them utterly detestable, but then again plenty of detestable people have biographical pages. Tareq Salahi should be notable just for his winery (he was famous in oenophile circles and is mentioned in dozens of books about wine), the ensuing legal dispute, his polo career, the polo cup, and the *ahem* "charity" that had all generated plenty of column inches in various news outlets before the Bravo TV show and the White House incident thrust the couple in the White House. Deleting a bio just because someone is an a--hole runs contrary to the point of this site existing. And this page is important for people to use to discover why this couple managed to scam their way into the White House. --Scooteristi (talk) 17:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC) Scooteristi
Don't Merge. If the context of their lives were solely the gate-crashing incident then yes, they should be merged, but in the context of his notorious family legal disputes, his polo career, and the fact that he won't be a "housewife" on the Bravo show they should be kept separate. --Scooteristi (talk) 17:33, 27 November 2009 (UTC) Scooteristi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scooteristi (talk • contribs)
Delete Only notable for the single event. caknuck _° needs to be running more often 20:12, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Tareq Salahi is not note worthy and it looks like spam. Somebody who works for newspaper put this up I'm sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.180.86.21 (talk) 21:12, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:BLP1E; we really must stop creating an article on every event or person who gets 15 minutes worth of fame. HonouraryMix (talk) 21:34, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. per Scooteristi --Banzoo (talk) 22:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We should not be hasty about creating articles for people whose notability is not yet determined. At the moment this is a BLP1E violation. Quantpole (talk) 22:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Michaele Salahi to form something like 2009 White House 'gatecrash' incident. (I concur.) This might lead to criminal charges, please note.--Conrad Kilroy (talk) 23:16, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - I agree with Conrad Kilroy's proposal, the articles should be merged to an article regarding the breach of security. Gage (talk) 23:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Intense dislike of publicity sluts like this, but they're just gaining notoriety by the minute, and there's no reason to delete an article on people with this much publicity notability. It's not deletable. Maybe merge as husband and wife, but I'm betting on two articles and individual notability. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 23:53, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Conrad Kilroy's proposal above. The event got significant media coverage, but this does not mean that the individuals themselves are noteworthy. --Eastlaw ^talk ⁄ _contribs 23:55, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Obviously these people shouldn't be encouraged, but they are, objectively quite notable. Even before this incident they probably could justify a page on their life, certainly can after it. I'm entirely amenable to seeing the two individual biographies merged, but I think their importance goes beyond just the gate-crashing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chironares (talk • contribs) 01:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Tareq Salahi was notable before the White House event. As the owner of Oasis Winery, he has received a decent amount of coverage prior to November 2009. See Breaking Away to Virginia and Maryland Wineries (2002) and The Middleburg Mystique: A Peek Inside the Gates of Middleburg, Virginia (2002). Both of these books provide significant coverage about Tareq Salahi and the work he has done as the owner of Oasis Winery. Additionally, there is the article titled Tareq Salahi - Owner, Oasis Winery, Hume, Va. from the Washington Post (date: Apr 15, 2001). Because Tareq Salahi was notable before the White House state dinner incident, the concerns about BLPE are invalidated. Cunard (talk) 01:23, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Merge it with the article on his wife, then rename as an article about the entire incident, as thats all they're really notable for; I for one don't really care about his polo career or legal problems, and there are plenty of other people who play polo or have trouble with the law who don't get articles. At present, all he and his wife are notable for is the party, and that in itself deserves an article, especially if it leads to Secret Service policy changes or leads to criminal charges.--C628 (talk) 1:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

The two books I cited above are not about his polo career, the White House state dinner incident, or his legal problems. The articles are about his career as the owner of Oasis Winery. Because the two publications came before the incident, I believe he is notable. Cunard (talk) 01:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There would appear to be about half a dozen references to Salahi in two books, all as part of a larger context, and a newspaper article about the winery, not him. Seems like they would be suitable material for an article about Oasis Winery, but I see nothing to advance the idea that he was a significant figure before this incident, beyond owning a business, which really isn't sufficient for inclusion in Wikipedia. C628 (talk)1:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

A sample from one of the books: "Salahi, the driving force behind Oasis, is also one of the most visible figures in Virginia's wine industries. He schedules an epic number of wine-related events and dinners at Oasis, as well as forging marketing partnerships with Wolf Trap Performing Arts Center, the nearby Marriott Ranch, and the Virginia Gold Cup..." This chapter provides sufficient information about Tareq Salahi to constitute "significant coverage" as per Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Salahi receives far more than "half a dozen references"; nearly every single paragraph of the two passages I cited above are about Salahi.
Owning a notable business would not sufficient for inclusion; however, receiving significant coverage about how he manages his business is sufficient for inclusion. Although Tareq Salahi is notable enough to have an article solely about himself, I am amenable to the merge proposed above. Cunard (talk) 02:05, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, you've convinced me that me could have an article of his own; however, I still believe that there should in some way be a separate article referring to the party incident as a whole. Already, it encompasses a greater scope than merely his life, as the Secret Service has issued statements to the effect that their policies are under review as a result; if this is indeed the case, and if criminal charges are filed, than it would become a significantly larger event, and should certainly receive a separate article. In this case, they wouldn't be merged as such, but parts of his article could be included, and there would probably be some overlap, but not an entire merging of articles.C628 (talk) 02:49, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest redirecting both of these to an article about the event. I haven't seen anything yet to suggest that wouldn't be sufficient. Savidan 01:39, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Merge~~ Also, a good precedent for merging the two article on the Salahi's is the "Balloon Boy" incident earlier this year, also on Wikipedia. Originally, during the event there were a couple of separate articles on the various people, which subsequently went through a candidate for deletion process as well. The outcome? All the articles were merged into one, which I believe is called "2009 Colorado Balloon Incident." The whole thing seems to bear a great deal of resemblance to this, and the outcome provides a good precedent for merging these articles. C628 (talk) 1:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Redundant vote struck. Cunard (talk) 02:10, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to an article about the incident, per continuing coverage such as in the NYT. Sandstein 02:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, at least for the moment until further information is found. I've seen news reports that Tareq & his wife Michaele are notable for being notorious social wannabes. If this story dies after a month, then these stories are unfounded rumors & we can revisit this & delete the article. (My chief attraction to this story is, why are the national media pushing this story? Is this a case where the Beltway Insiders are upset at this couple & want to make an example of them?) -- llywrch (talk) 03:08, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I created the article 2009 White House 'gatecrash' incident based on Gate-crashing, as many suggested its creation, and it would have inevitably been created at one point. It was also given undue weight and suffered from recentism in the article Gate-crashing. Cenarium (talk) 03:40, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete They're not notable besides the fact that they breached security and should surely face criminal charges. Let's not feed into this couple's desire to have media attention and/or a reality show. conman33 (. . .talk) 05:43, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge both Tareq and Michaele into one event article, keeping the individual entries as redirects, ideally to sub-headers within the combined article. Because of WP:BLP1E and the fact that the articles are nearly identical. The incident was definitely notable, so no reason for deleting altogether. gidonb (talk) 05:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge along with Michaele Salahi into 2009 White House 'gatecrash' incident. Notable for the event, not notable in their own right.DCmacnut <> 06:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge along with Michaele Salahi into general Gate-crashing article. It's not a big enough deal to support its own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.142.90.33 (talk) 07:36, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep--Nshervsampad (talk) 07:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge along with Michaele Salahi into one brief paragraph in 2009 White House gatecrash incident. --Lambiam 08:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Taku (talk) 14:06, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into 2009 White House gatecrash incident. Salahi does not merit his own article (see WP:BLP1E) but his name is now a plausible redirect and some of the information in this article could definitely be merged into the aforementioned article, especially considering the fact that it's a stub at the moment. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. These folks are remarkable in their circle. If Paris Hilton has a page in Wiki, they certainly should too. And face it - crashing the White House is not a simple party crash it has super far reaching ramifications. The Shoe Bomber, for example resulted in in changes in airline security globally, even though he crashed a flight and was bumbling around unsuccessfully trying to light a fuse on his stupidly (thankfully) designed thingy shoe. --MexicoDoug (talk) 16:37, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into 2009 White House gatecrash incident. I've put the template on the two articles. --Vlad|-> 18:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. They may be publicity sluts; but just because they did something to embarass a president most of you are in love with doesn't mean this page should be deleted. Besides, if an unremarkable dude like Jason Kottke deserve a Wikipedia entry, so do they, as it could've been a historical moment for the country.--Dministrator (talk) 19:22, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and merge into article about event. Honestly, how many WP:BLP1E articles need to be created? Andrewlp1991 (talk) 19:23, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to 2009 White House gatecrash incident, at least until there is sufficient information on him in reliable sources outside the context of that incident. It does not appear to be disputed that the incident itself is notable, so outright deletion should not be considered an option. Merger there should not be taken as an excuse to prune all information about him as an individual, given that (as with the parents who perpetrated the Balloon Boy hoax) their bios as hopeful media/reality TV stars provide helpful context for understanding this incident and their motivations. WP:BLP1E might need to be reworked given that it is often used as a blunt club to support deletion of anyone covered in reliable sources because of one event, regardless of whether that event only occurred because of that person. When the event itself is indisputably notable, those who perpetrated it at minimum merit coverage in an article on that incident. The oft-ignored statement at WP:BLP1E is: "If the event is significant and the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate biography may be appropriate." I would also support merger of the Salahis two articles into one on both of them, maintained separate from the incident article, but at this stage merger with the incident article is probably best. postdlf (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to be consistent with similar or more serious White House intrusions. We have three articles covering this, and only on the other incidents in this list. As far as I can tell they haven't stolen military hardware, attempted to assassinate the president, or tried to destroy the White House itself, so if anything this should have one article, and those should have two or three. WFCforLife (talk) 22:39, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Side comment, can husband and wife be co-list? Having to post identical arguments twice is a collossal waste of time and server space, and it's inconceivable that one would be deleted and the other kept. WFCforLife (talk) 22:39, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. --77.181.194.106 (talk) 00:05, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to 2009 White House gatecrash incident. My support for that incident article is a weak keep at best, but one thing is clear: a separate article for Michaele Salahi and Tareq is completely unnecessary, especially when they are both known for one event that already has its own article in the first place. What a mess this one is going to be... — Hunter Kahn _(c) 23:49, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note - If the individual articles should be kept, I would also strongly argue that they be combined into something like Tareq and Michaele Salahi, rather than kept as two. As both are notable for the same things, it would be unnecessarily redundant to have one for both. — Hunter Kahn _(c) 23:27, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Both Salahi's are at least as noteworthy as the balloon boy's parents, and their notoriety stretches back months before this one incident. However, the page covering the incident should probably go away. // Internet Esquire (talk) 02:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You say they are at least as notable as the Balloon boy parents. However, those people do not have Wikipedia pages; the Balloon boy hoax itself does. By your own logic, it would be better to merge/redirect Tareq and Michaele's pages to the incident article, rather than keep the two individuals. — Hunter Kahn _(c) 23:27, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2009 White House gatecrash incident. We can revisit deleting the gatecrash itself once the notability of the consequences have become clear. This person is otherwise non-notable.Cmholm (talk) 08:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*Merge or redirect most of the information is located in 2009 White House gatecrash incident. If something more becomes notable about him and possibly his wife (ie: legal case, TV show, etc) then maybe the article will show notability. Then maybe the article title should include his wife instead of the two articles that now appear. More notability needs to be shown or it becomes one event. Thanks, --CrohnieGal^Talk 12:28, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete After watching the article and reading opinions here I have changed my mind and think it's best to not have the article. Comments made by others here esp. BLP1 are convincing to me. The news about this has conflicting info now also which comes into my change. I have stricked my previous comments. Thanks, --CrohnieGal^Talk 15:26, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect. He's only known for gatecrashing a dinner. All the press coverage of him as a polo player or vintner was either in passing or local (Washington Post), failing to show any real notability. People known only for one event generally don't get articles written about them. Fences&Windows 16:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
MERGE with the wife's article. There would seem to be enough reliable sources documenting their notoriety prior to this brouhaha.<br. />--NBahn (talk) 17:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2009 White House gatecrash incident as a WP:BLP1E. His winery might possibly be notable, but I don't see any evidence that he is beyond this one event. Robofish (talk) 00:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into 2009 White House gatecrash incident.--Pink Bull 00:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - merge into 2009 White House gatecrash incident.--Blargh29 (talk) 01:49, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into 2009 White House gatecrash incident. Inks.LWC (talk) 06:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notability should be easy to prove by now, in tons of sources. (Like it or not) Nigel Barristoat (talk) 16:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the articles for Michaele Salahi and Tareq Salahi into 2009 White House gatecrash incident. This has been an important event of US President Obama's Administration, and will likely have an impact on the Secret Service, but separate articles violate WP:UNDUE. Bearian (talk) 19:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as the last two to say Merge said.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not news and this person will likely not be notable for more than 15 minutes. (Failing that, merge.) Jonathunder (talk) 23:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Merge Yet another recent news event from non-notable attention-seekers. Reywas92^Talk 00:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge this article with Michaele Salahi. This is a major new story. I am Zeus, king of the gods (talk) 02:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Stong keep. This is not the only known time the couple crashed an Obama party. What really makes him notable is that neither of the events were crashes....there was an inside white house connection. The fact that he is a lobbyist for an extreme Palestinian group is what makes this person truly notable...not to mention the cover-up involving in [website] scrubbing his identity from the board membership of the Palestinian group. Cdcdoc (talk) 03:44, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and rename to the incident, as described by other editors. Significant event due to lapse of Secret Service. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:53, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to 2009 White House gatecrash incident. See here for my longer comment on that article. All three of these articles should have been considered together and it's probably advisable for the same admin to close all of them. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 06:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Definitely a completely non-notable couple. Only warrants an entry in the Gate-crashing article. Doesn't warrant his own article, as it shall encourage notoriety as opposed to notability on Wikipedia as well as in public conduct. It would also mean all moderately successful businessmen will get entry into Wikipedia, thus wasting voluntary donations; while all of them can very well afford their own sites to promote them and their businesses. Mandot —Preceding undated comment added 10:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Redirect to 2009 White House gatecrash incident . This is a non-notable couple except for this single incident . Marokwitz (talk) 15:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP : I wanted to know about this man , and Wikipedia gave me that information. It is very useful to know this man is half Palestinian and is involved politically with that issue. Thank you, and KEEP this article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.60.33.69 (talk) 16:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep People are citing WP:BLP1E, but note that it says "The significance of an event or individual should be indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources." Thus far he's been the subject of non-stop media coverage for a week, and with ongoing investigations and a likely Congressional hearing, the coverage is likely to continue for weeks to come. Obviously, we can't predict the future, but we can afford to wait and see how the story unfolds before deciding whether to merge into the event page. Binarybits (talk) 17:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Merge into article about incident; this man and the couple's legal woes are not noteworthy. And to those referring to the excessive press coverage as reasons to Keep, the coverage is of the incident, not of their personal lives, which are completely non-notable. If he later proves to be some kind of extremist insider/collaborator (the idea of which right now I attribute to some baseless prejudice), then he'll be noteworthy. —Godheval^{T C H} 18:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Purely WP:RECENTISM, will be totally forgotten in a matter of weeks (OK, maybe months). -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 19:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't think his wife is as an individual, but he seems to be notable enough outside of the recent gate-crashing incident. Just because you didn't know of him before this week doesn't means others didn't, or that he's not notable. I understand the need to limit single incidents from creating articles about non-notable people who catch a few minutes of fame, but this is not a blue-collar nobody who just pulled a one-off publicity stunt. Those calling BLP1E and Recentism are jumping the gun out of paranoia, which is understandable given how much those two policies have to be enforced, but I do not find those applicable here. Now there are certainly some bloated details here - it's not necessary for Wikipedia to include the number of bridesmaids or groomsmen the couple had - but that's not what we're talking about in this vote... - Slow Graffiti (talk) 21:44, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.155.128.110 (talk) 03:08, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Because the man has done some things to a certain level, including only running the winery, not owning it, does note make him notable prior to the alleged gate-crashing. Let's not forget that this, at present, is only an accusation. To me, the content meant to support his notability really has been stretched. Some of the sources in the article defy the concept of reliability: poptower.com, gossiprocks.com, askmissa.com, webofdeception.com? Eek. If this results in keep or merge for some reason, someone needs to consult WP:BLP. Wildhartlivie (talk) 08:45, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge to 2009 White House gatecrash incident the lead says it all, she's notable only for this, so send it there. BLP1E--Scott Mac (Doc) 13:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep to control for libel (multiple notability). He was in the (2007 and November 2008) Washington Post about the Oasis Winery lawsuit, plus polo news. We must guard the article against posting rumors, so having his name "Tareq Salahi" as the article title helps to attract all libel where it can be more easily reverted (or protected against). Because he is in multiple major-source events (NOT WP:BLP1E), he does have WP notability. However, his former-cheerleader wife should likely be merged to his article (as a redirect). I have created disambiguation page "Salahi" to list them both, along with famous Arabic translator/columnist Adil Salahi. -Wikid77 (talk) 15:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, exclusion exactly to prevent discussions as above. That being said, the section about the family business should be likewise cut from the gate-crashing article as out of context. [[::User:Usrnme h8er|Usrnme h8er]] ([[::User talk:Usrnme h8er|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Usrnme h8er|contribs]]) 15:43, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Merge to 2009 White House gatecrash incident.VR _talk 19:25, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete - This is English Wikipedia not American Wikipedia. And this certainly isn't a showbiz blog. This is not even major news outside the USA, compared with more important events which don't have their own articles (because they didn't happen in the USA, presumably). Rapido (talk) 20:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete These people did this stunt to gain popularity and this article is proof of that. WP is not a tabloid and I see absolutely no long term notability for the that the incident page itself cannot cover. Wikipedia is NOT wikinews! Corpx (talk) 02:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]