Deletion of Al Zaghab

Comment: If we don't give  any credence than how about .  What ever the case may be with policy shifting the fundamentals stay the same: No sources then no article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:ATT||WP:V)

Comment: edit conflict) There are a number of steps that could have been taken with these articles that would be far more appropriate and useful than merely tagging with {{tl|unreferenced}} and expecting that someone would magically come along and clean it up, then bringing it to AfD to be hurriedly looked over by a bunch of people who can't speak Arabic. One obvious thing would be to bring it to the attention of Wikipedia:WikiProject Palestine|WikiProject Palestine or other Arabic speakers. In practise, Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English is also sometimes used to request verification by a foreign-language speaker for articles which can't be sourced in English. On the other hand, |countering systemic bias is ''not'' a reason to keep non-notable or non-verifiable material, though it may be a reason to allow people more time to get sources, or to give more weight to GHits from countries with little Internet presence, or to recuse yourself from voting either Keep or Delete if you can't contribute usefully to the process of figuring out whether something is notable or not
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Systemic bias (WP:CSB)

Comment: I'll give a good reason for deletion: these articles completely fail .  They were created in November of 2006, unimproved since, and there is no reason to presume that they will be improved now.  Assertions that people should just go and research references are in direct contradiction to the requirements of  -- to quote, "The burden of evidence lies with the editor wishing to add or retain the material. If an article topic has no reliable sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on it."  I suggest that the the Keep !voters not just presume (in the face of a complete lack of evidence) that these subjects are notable; rather that they demonstrate it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:ATT||WP:ATT)

Comment: Relevant for anyone interested in Palestinians and their ethno-political dynamics , quite a hot topic these days.  It should be  better referenced, although sources in Arabic may be all one can find. Still, it provides apparently credible and quite significant contextual information.  may be an issue here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Systemic bias (WP:BIAS)