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 no consensus. This hasn't happened to me as an AfD closer before, but this discussion is useless because it consists mostly of opinions that are without merit in the light of applicable policies and guidelines. The nominator's statements consist only of barely coherent rants, and the first "keep" opinion makes basically no argument (although it would be difficult to make any given the nomination). Only the second "keep" opinion makes reasonable arguments. But there's no hope of anything resembling consensus resulting from this mess, even if I were to relist it. Anybody who is not WikiUpdater92 is free to renominate this if there is a reasonable case for deletion to be made. And WikiUpdater92, if you continue in this vein, you'll likely be blocked. Sandstein 19:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Ibrahim[edit]

Johnny Ibrahim (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 neutral, false statements, non viable references WikiUpdater92 (talk) 09:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiUpdater92 I think you accidentally posted the wrong page here. PageName have been deleted since the 2009. Carpimaps (talk) 10:12, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it for you. Carpimaps (talk) 10:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Bilateral relations, Lebanon, and Argentina. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:17, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I think it could be improved, but I dont think it deserved to be deleted PalauanReich (talk) 02:52, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio ^giuliano 11:19, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: because ambassadors have imternational duties, it is not easy for one to be non-notable, and the two sources there already focus on Ibrahim and are arguably significant coverage, per WP:GNG. Also, the rejection of an ambassador by a pope is notable in itself. Moonraker (talk) 13:09, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  DELETE

  The information published is defamatory and ill founded.  The only source that refers to Amb. Ibrahim relays false information published initially on a Lebanese news website. The said website was ordered by the competent Tribunal to delete all reference to Ambassador Ibrahim from its website and archives.

  The Pope, or the Holy See, never declared, announced, or communicated that the nomination was rejected.  Ambassador Ibrahim never commented on the defamatory news except before the Court of Law. He never admitted or denied anything.  

  Defamatory and false information shall not be tolerated on Wikipedia. Recalling that this article was published on Wikipedia 5 years after the false news in the media.  Is the author of this article linked to those indicted by the Court of Law few years ago!  Where is the public interest in diffusing false, defamatory, obsolete, and irrelevant information 5 years after!!! WikiUpdater92 (talk) 06:20, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiUpdater92, instead of making BOLDED accusations, why don't you try to improve the article by editing? That's typically how we handle questionable material on Wikipedia, by improving article content, not laying down condemnations. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:00, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

● Delete.

How do you improve fake news?

Reference article "1" is ill-based, and article "2" is entirely irrelevant not even talking about the Ambassador or the Pope. WikiUpdater92 (talk) 13:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination is considered your "Delete" vote so I'm striking your second vote. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:23, 10 March 2023 (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.