The result was speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator. ( non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 19:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced BLP created prior to BLPPROD process Fiddle Faddle 17:25, 11 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Withdrawn per this diff Fiddle Faddle 17:51, 11 August 2013 (UTC) reply
A new contributor, who I believe is acting in good faith, turned this redirect, into a (weak) article. I suggested on the nominator's talk page that this article title should be restored a redirect to Saudi detainees at Guantanamo Bay. While I think many individual captives whose names are currently redirected to the articles about the captives are notable enough to merit restoring those articles back to full article status, I think that respect for all those who have weighed in at earlier {{ afd}}s should prevent restoring these redirects to article status until the restored article is very robust and is obviously not a candidate for deletion.
Several of the articles that have been deleted, for instance, were for individuals who were the subject of entire books, or had faced charges before the Guantanamo war crimes commissions. Of the articles titles that are currently redirected, I think restoration to full article status should start with those that are the strongest candidate. I think those restorations should be done cautiously, with a draft somewhere not in article space, where comments and improvements can be proposed, so it really is ready, when it is moved to article space. Geo Swan ( talk) 18:13, 11 August 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator. ( non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 19:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Unreferenced BLP created prior to BLPPROD process Fiddle Faddle 17:25, 11 August 2013 (UTC) reply
Withdrawn per this diff Fiddle Faddle 17:51, 11 August 2013 (UTC) reply
A new contributor, who I believe is acting in good faith, turned this redirect, into a (weak) article. I suggested on the nominator's talk page that this article title should be restored a redirect to Saudi detainees at Guantanamo Bay. While I think many individual captives whose names are currently redirected to the articles about the captives are notable enough to merit restoring those articles back to full article status, I think that respect for all those who have weighed in at earlier {{ afd}}s should prevent restoring these redirects to article status until the restored article is very robust and is obviously not a candidate for deletion.
Several of the articles that have been deleted, for instance, were for individuals who were the subject of entire books, or had faced charges before the Guantanamo war crimes commissions. Of the articles titles that are currently redirected, I think restoration to full article status should start with those that are the strongest candidate. I think those restorations should be done cautiously, with a draft somewhere not in article space, where comments and improvements can be proposed, so it really is ready, when it is moved to article space. Geo Swan ( talk) 18:13, 11 August 2013 (UTC) reply