Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shawish

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 with no prejudice against speedy renomination. Writing more than one !vote keep does not give any more weight to your arguments and only serve to confuse things. (non-admin closure) KTC (talk) 15:10, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shawish

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

Notability not established in article. Rafy talk 14:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 14:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable family as the article indicates. That much is sourced at least. The article still needs work, but it certainly isn't worthy of being deleted. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The name comes from Ottoman tr:Çavuş and it is widely used as a surname in several countries in North Africa and the Middle East without necessary being related, just as you'll find thousands of families named Najjar and Haddad, etc.

None of the sources mention this certain family from Jerusalem. This one mentions a certain Shawish who owned a large library, nothing about the family. The Ha'aretz doesn't even mention anything about this family. Similarly other references concern members of other families in Egypt.--Rafy talk 18:42, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:23, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's clear from the graph (which was built from This article ) that the family had branched from "Alhusaini" family which originally came from Arabia. But the 1st mention of the Shawish family which is the one most listed people belong to, was from Jerusalem. All members listed are notable and well referenced. From politicians, scientist, scholars to business leaders and sport people. I see some weaknesses in the article and it needs some work, but its definitely not for deletion. Kaioo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.202.226.158 (talk) 19:14, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have "undone" the deleted entries to the page. 40+ notable members of the family are the source of the importance of the article. They are notable, well referenced (105 sources) and justify the existence of the article. Please do not remove them before reaching an agreement in here. The article, for sure, is worthless without the notable family members list. I am keen to adjust the article, do more research and correct the wrongs (basically put in the work). So lets make a list of weaknesses and agree on it and I will take it from there. --Kaio™ (talk) 20:04, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep after reviewing, Wikipedia:Notability_(people), and subsection Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Lists_of_people I see that almost all the names listed in the notable list meet the criteria for notability. Please highlight in here if some don't and I will do the research to make the point stronger or delete the entry. --Kaio™ (talk) 11:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that you didn't know that casting votes logged out is considered WP:SOCK. The source mentioned by anon is an opinion article written by a self described "secondary school students' counsellor and Islamic preacher". Even in that poor source nothing is mentioned about the family itself, except as a surname of a certain Sheikh renowned for his library.

If you can't bring enough notable references to support this article, i.e. Published books, Peer reviewed journals, Encyclopaedia of Islam, etc. I can't find any reason why any encyclopaedia should contain this entry.--Rafy talk 19:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We can take the article section by section.. most of the names in the notable list are notable and referenced, which are the core of the article. Which section are you exactly referring to in here? What is the issue here? is it that the family origin not well established with references? This article is definitely not for deletion and meets many of the acceptable article criteria, so lets talk about how to make it better. ( BTW, This is not SOCK, I voted without logging in 1st time because I didnt have my password.. now I do. Thanks for the note anyway)..--Kaio™ (talk) 09:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not about a list of people, it's about the Shawish family itself. So if you want to keep the article bring reliable sources about the family, otherwise convert it to a WP:DAB.--Rafy talk 13:22, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree to that, the focus to be on the (one branch of) family and its origins weakens the article. I would suggest changing the name to "Shawish surname" (which will include referenced information on the many origin and branches of Shawish surname as well as a list of notable Shawish persons) OR "a list of notable people with Shawish surname" (which will include only a referenced list of notable Shawish persons without much being discussed about their family branch and/or its origin). Maybe this will bring along a good solution. I would go for the 1st option as to keep some of the current references relating to the family from Jerusalem and to encourage others to bring along new referenced material on other origins of Shawish surname. This will improve the richness and usefulness of the article --Kaio™ (talk) 06:08, 14 October 2012 (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.