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. NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hala Al Turk[edit]

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

PROD with absolutely no explanations at all, I still confirm it as there's still nothing for actual substance. SwisterTwister talk 21:10, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - Page needs additional references for verification but subject is well-covered in reliable sources. Meatsgains (talk) 21:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per failure of WP:MUSICBIO. Whether the subject has, to quote said policy, been "the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself" is borderline; most of the sources I can find are from Al Bawaba, a Middle Eastern media website which, while independent and reliable enough on its own, seems to be the only mainstream source to cover Al Turk. As such, this coverage alone does not indicate notability. There is no evidence she passes any of the other criteria of this guideline (as far as I can tell, she hasn't charted, won a major award, etc.); thus, her notability hinges on the scope of coverage, which seems to be lacking. It may be possible, however, that reliable sources exist in Arabic; if this is the case, judging by the sources' quality (and taking into account that notability does not necessarily transmute across languages), she may still pass the first criteria of WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG. As such, I've added a source bar for her Arabic name; I've searched in Arabic, but with what I've been able to comprehend through dumpy Google Translate and my limited knowledge of the reliability of the sources, I don't see enough to make a solid case for notability. (Meatsgains, it would be great if you could provide some links to the sources you've found.) ~~Taking all of this into account, and noting that the case for preservation as of yet is weak, I'd have to say "delete".~~ Colonel Wilhelm Klink (^Complaints|_Mistakes) 01:45, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bahrain-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:17, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The National and Gulf News report she was nominated for Nickelodeon's 2016 Kids Choice Awards for favorite Arab act. There are multiple articles in Al Bawaba detailing the subject, as you noted. Below are a couple other sources I found:

I think there are enough RS out there covering the subject to qualify for notability. Meatsgains (talk) 17:30, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for digging these up; while her award nominations themselves are not enough to achieve notability, the coverage of them, along with the additional coverage outside of those nominations, is in my opinion enough to scrape by WP:GNG. This does seem to be quite borderline, but, with a total of about nine sources in the mainstream press, only two of which (the award noms) seem trivial, it's enough to sway me to weak keep. Colonel Wilhelm Klink (^Complaints|_Mistakes) 17:50, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - I'd have to agree, this is definitely a close one! I'm curious to see what others have to say. Meatsgains (talk) 19:09, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Thanks to Meatsgains. I have no problem voicing a keep for Bahrain's Selena Gomez, since she is covered by RS. Geo Swan (talk) 15:28, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:41, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets WP:GNG. Article could use expansion and improved referencing per WP:ATD. Hmlarson (talk) 16:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes GNG. Nice sourcing by others. To add to that, if you do a HighBeam Search, you'll she she's covered extensively over time. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:34, 23 August 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.