Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Girls At The Cairo National Stadium (2nd nomination)

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 Keep. Synergy 03:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Girls_At_The_Cairo_National_Stadium

not notable stalker video shot by person not notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia entry himself TruthGal (talk) 06:52, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As far as I can see, there is no real change from the 2006 article which has a AfD closed as "no consensus". I am certain that the arguments from the 2006 case are thus the same and I am with the ones who judged "keep" two years ago as I think the facts they mentioned have not changed. So#Why 08:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. —Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 13:24, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 13:24, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, the article cites reasonable external sources, but in my opinion the notability is pretty weak. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 13:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the external sources are:

the video itself
an article talking about the content of the video
an article entirely in Hebrew which may or may not mention the video
a Egyptian soccer blog with no current reference to this stalker video
the blog of the guy who shot this video (and who is not notable enough to merit an entry in Wikipedia)

So that's really only one article about the video. So If it's the sources that are tilting you towards Weak keep rather than Delete, I would kindly ask you to reconsider. This is a Wikipedia entry based on one article. TruthGal (talk) 15:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A critical article about the content of the video qualifies as a non-trivial external source. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 20:20, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep It has been mentioned in at least one source then. It seems to be notable enough. (The article in the Egyptian newspaper give it non-trivial coverage and I'm assuming good faith about the Hebrew article.) Steve Dufour (talk) 17:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All due respect, this is like if Wikipedia had an entry for the R Kelly video but no entry for R Kelly. Or an entry for Guernica but no entry for Picasso. If this is truly a notable "art piece" made by an actual artist, it would be included as part of the entry for the artist. But the Wiki entry for the artist has been deleted three times for NN - see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nimrod_Kamer&action=edit&redlink=1 TruthGal (talk) 00:27, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it was judged by WP's standards of notability for films it would not pass the test. However it seems somewhat notable as an historic event which got some media coverage and comment. Steve Dufour (talk) 01:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I guess... if you define "some media coverage" as one article in one online newspaper. A Google search turns up no other English news media site reporting on the video. TruthGal (talk) 02:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll change my vote to "weak keep" since the media coverage was rather weak. Steve Dufour (talk) 04:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I hadnt expected to say this--but the references are sufficient. sources for an article do not have to be in English. DGG (talk) 02:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per User:DGG, User:Steve Dufour, and User:Amire80. With all respect, this AfD is about the film and not the filmmaker. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 04:26, 1 August 2008 (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.