Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emir Bayghazin

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 no consensus with no prejudice against speedy renomination (non-admin closure) czar · · 18:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Emir Bayghazin[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No assertion of notability, following a contested "prod". The Rambling Man (talk) 21:10, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kazakhstan-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (state the obvious) @ 22:41, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (shout) @ 22:41, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep US Embassy of the Republic of Kazakhstan website in DC features "Kazakhstan's Emir Baygazin movie got Berlinale World Cinema Fund prize. Tengrinews" Jan 18 2013: ... this is notable. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:14, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also wondering what "a contested "prod" means. Unsourced articles are proded, other editors come along and add sources. Then the unsourced prod tag becomes non-applicable. There is no "contested prod" because the prod tag was correctly added, correctly sourced, and correctly removed. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:24, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Anyone can legitimately remove a PROD tag without explanation or any other changes being made to an article. It is unlike other tags in that regard. The term "contested prod" is fairly common parlance to indicate that a PROD was added and then removed. It gives some background to why the nominator has come to an AfD, but it doesn't count against the article or anything. The AfD still only judges the article as it now is. Bondegezou (talk) 08:47, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 06:47, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 18:05, 12 June 2013 (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.