Deletion of Houssein Omar Hassan

Comment: if possible): per the above mentioned Wikipedia:ATD|ATD '''OR Delete'''. |Non-notable individual that fails |GNG A |pseudo biographical --- Wikipedia:What is one event|''single event'' (|BLP1E). "IF" an 80,000-strong stadium crowd cheered for the subject to win then there is notability for inclusion in the Djibouti at the 2012 Summer Paralympics article. It might be newsworthy if the miricle of what is listed in the article happened. The article refers to the subject as a ''"right arm paraplegic"''. This last word is indicative of someone suffering from paraplegia that affects the lower extremities. I suppose that a person suffering from paralysis of a single limb could be referred to as having monoplegia but I think that does not count when the limb is totally missing. In a http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/sports/2012paraolympic/201209/02/content_15727030.htm picture of the event the one armed subject is shown running (not in a wheel chair) so there is confusion with this. '''Note''': Wikipedia:NSPORTS|NSPORTS cannot be used in arguments for "Keep" concerning a |BLP involving a single event. When a |policy and guideline conflicts (until resolution): ''"if a guideline appears to conflict with a policy, editors may assume that the policy takes precedence."''. If we want to keep an article against WP:policies and guidelines|multiple policies and guidelines we are suppose to seek consensus for |"ignoring the rules" meaning the article improves Wikipedia regardless of the rules. It is not a given that a mistaken (or false) rationale for "keep" automatically means to ignore the "rules". Come on people!! A "heartwarming story" also does not give a minor participant in one single major event a greenlight for an article because it made the ikipedia is not a newspaper|news. Wikipedia is not the place for a collection of |indiscriminate information
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABILITY||WP:GNG||WP:PSEUDO||WP:BLP1E||WP:BLP||WP:POLCON||WP:IGNORE||WP:W||WP:INDISCRIMINATE)

Comment: Per  (which, like , and unlike anything quoted by the !keep votes, is grounded in policy). The sources fail to meet the fundamental guidelines—per WP:ANYBIO—regarding the |depth or |persistence of coverage to warrant a stand-alone article, particularly one which is merely duplication, and there's nothing |undue about the weight given to it in the parent article
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD||WP:PRESERVE||WP:DEPTH||WP:PERSISTENCE||WP:UNDUE)