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. The main policy argument for keeping was WP:NACADEMIC bullet #3. This requires that "The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society ... or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor". This is not the case with the RACS - fellowship is granted on passing an exam. That is, it proves he is qualified to do his job, not that he is notable. Sources offered in support of WP:GNG were deemed insufficient to establish nothability by participants. No credible counter-arguments were offered why these sources met our guidelines. SpinningSpark 18:28, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Laith Barnouti[edit]

Laith Barnouti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Non notable doctor who lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of him. A before search mirrors the sources used in the article which are a plethora of unreliable primary social media sources and the rest are user generated. Celestina007 (talk) 21:54, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 21:54, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As per nom, fails WP:GNG. MickyShy (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:11, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MickyShy: Have you checked the sources within the article? He seems to meet all the criteria for WP:GNG. Magadlis (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete fails WP:BIO. His sporting career also fails WP:ATHLETE. LibStar (talk) 23:15, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar: He has credible claim of significance as per the many reliable sources that discuss him independently. I lay those out in my vote reply. Magadlis (talk) 03:06, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I stand by my delete !vote despite the new sources added. LibStar (talk) 03:09, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I have added new refs that weren't included in the initial write-up of the article, so please have another look. The plastic surgeon has credible claim of significance demonstrated through the many reliable sources that discuss him independently. These are by no means unreliable primary social media sources or user generated content. Examples are New York Post, 9 News, ABC News Australia, SBS Australia, The Sydney Morning Herald, news.com.au, Mamamia, Stuff, and New Idea Magazine which are all independent of him. The doctor is notable and the article's got enough proper sources to justify its existence.Magadlis (talk) 02:50, 3 December 2021 (UTC) — Magadlis (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

@Celestina007: If I have failed to demonstrate his notability then I am happy to hear what can be improved, but I think your assessment is off the mark.Magadlis (talk) 02:51, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The new sources may be "reliable" but it is more the Doctor making comments on surgical practices rather that about the Doctor as the subject. LibStar (talk) 03:03, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some of them are which still discuss him to some extent, but some discuss him as the main subject of the article. Examples are the SBS Australia and Stuff sources.Magadlis (talk) 03:14, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did a Google translate on the text at https://www.sbs.com.au/language/arabic/audio/sb-200-hl-m-fy-nh-llm-bsbb-mlyt-ltjmyl , again this is merely the Dr commenting on surgical practices, it is not indepth about him as the subject. LibStar (talk) 03:20, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I meant the other one at https://www.sbs.com.au/language/arabic/audio/plastic-surgeon-dr-laith-barnouti-plays-oud-instrument Magadlis (talk) 03:24, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment — This is to note that the only advocate to retain this article on mainspace @Magadlis, is the article creator. Celestina007 (talk) 15:15, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Passes WP:Prof. He is a fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS), a member of the Australasian Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS) and the Australian Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS).Angiewalter37 (talk) 03:13, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think WP:NACADEMIC point 3 refers to being elected a member of a society. This is different from a medical college where one applies to join, you are not elected into a medical college. Also being a member of the Australasian Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS) and the Australian Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) doesn't really add to notability. LibStar (talk) 01:15, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I think he just passes WP:Prof, but it likely to pass it more easily in the future. --Bduke (talk) 01:16, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

which part of WP:PROF does he pass? LibStar (talk) 23:38, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACADEMIC. While the subject is a member of several academic organizations in his field, these organizations allow anyone working in the field to join them and are not "elected" member organizations (beyond those serving on the governing boards). As such, fails criteria 3 of WP:NACADEMIC. The subject also does not pass any of the other criteria at WP:PROF. Additionally, the topic lacks sources where the Barnouti is the main subject. Fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 14:44, 15 December 2021 (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.