Deletion of Salim Suliman Al Harbi

Comment: none are notable as they lack "significant coverage" in reliable sources per  and what little information exists on them is already included elsewhere
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per , these articles all present information about significant detainees that have garnered wide coverage in independent, reliable sources.  Furthermore, the nominator appears to have failed to consider  when nominating this group (as well as others) as none of these articles contain identical content, hoaxes, spam, or identical products (or people). I also note that previous AfDs (linked above) by this same nominator have led to  of their page histories when merged with other articles, violating  and #KEEP. I also take note that a small group of admins and editors all with pro-American, pro-Military bias beyond the general  BIAS appear to follow AfD nominations by DBigXray very closely with votes to delete and rather quick admin closures to delete (I'm looking at you Bushranger, RightCowLeftCoast, AnotherClown, Bearian, etc.). I'm suprised by how few of DBigXrays nominations get relisted, even when there are as few as 3 comments to delete. What is going on here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BUNDLE||WP:SELDEL||WP:PRESERVE||WP:R||WP:SYSTEMIC)

Comment: to the appropriate 'Fooian detainees at Guantanamo Bay' lists. Keep arguments fail / and . Detainees are not notable simply for the fact they are being detained, and they are not notable because the detainment facility balooned in notability following their detainment; most sources above are only passing mentioned. Being mentioned in an article does not make one notable
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:1E||WP:BLP1E||WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: These recent terrorism related AfD's all appear to be for articles that are reasonably sourced and have histories dating back years. At first glance these guys appear to be 's, but many have garnered  write-ups and  beyond just the initial event. The AfD seems to suggest that there is a historical precedent set for deleting these articles, but while the articles are old, the AfD's all started in just the past two weeks. Nearly all have a recommended merge or redirect target, yet they all end up deleted. And then in some cases, someone recreates the recently deleted page as a redirect to the specified target, but only after the page is deleted. This |selective deletion removes any potentially useful page history for the redirect, violating  and #KEEP. Moreover, these group nominations appear to have been done half-assardly because they don't all conform to a specific template or category (aside from being enemies of the US). I want to assume good faith, but these issues seem really fishy
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:INDEPTH||WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE||WP:SELDEL||WP:PRESERVE||WP:R)

Comment: the article this AFD was created for Salim Suliman Al Harbi - he is not otable for a wikipedia biography under his name and was released without even charge
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: to Yemeni detainees at Guantanamo Bay. As individuals they are not independently notable per , , or . That being said if they are listed in a group that maybe notable as a subject itself, then a redirect to said list can be left in the former article space leading to that list
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ANYBIO||WP:SOLDIER)